Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true, consistent with 'fetch'. The description adds context: GraphQL node query, return fields, and important note about legacy numeric IDs needing conversion. No contradictions; description enriches beyond annotations.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Two purposeful sentences: first states core functionality and return fields, second provides sibling guidance. No wasted words, front-loaded with key information.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a simple read-only tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description fully covers: purpose, return values, ID type handling, and alternative tool. No gaps.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Only one parameter 'id' with rich schema description explaining it's a GraphQL global ID and how to handle legacy IDs. Main description adds 'GraphQL global Customer ID' context. 100% schema coverage means schema already provides detail; description adds slight extra clarity.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the verb 'fetch', the resource 'customer', uses GraphQL node query, and lists return fields (id, legacyId, name, company, created-at). It distinguishes from sibling tool braintree_customer_payment_methods by mentioning that tool for payment methods.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Explicitly tells when to use this tool (fetch basic customer info) and when to use alternative (braintree_customer_payment_methods for payment methods). The instruction on ID type also guides correct usage.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.