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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, and 'GET /customers' merely restates that. It adds nothing about pagination behavior (page/pageSize), default page size, result caps, or auth requirements, which is the context a read-only listing tool would benefit from.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with the resource first. The trailing 'Dub: GET /customers' adds little beyond the verb already stated and the tool name, but the total length is tight and non-repetitive.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description could reasonably say what a listed customer contains or how pagination is returned, which it omits. It is minimally adequate for a filtered list endpoint whose safety profile is covered by annotations.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents all six parameters. The description's mention of email/external id/link loosely maps to three of them but contributes no format or syntax detail beyond the schema. Baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('List the customers Dub has attributed to links') and enumerates the filter axes (email, external id, link). This distinguishes it from the singular sibling dub_get_customer, though it never names that sibling explicitly.

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?

Usage is implied by the filter axes listed, but the description never says when to prefer this over dub_get_customer (single lookup) or dub_list_events/commissions. No explicit when-to-use or exclusions are given.

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