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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, so the write nature is covered by structured data. The description adds the REST mapping (POST /customers) and the fact that contacts are optional, but says nothing about auth requirements, duplicate handling, or side effects beyond creation.

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 short sentences, front-loaded with the operation type and resource before the transport detail. No filler, though the REST endpoint line is of limited selection value.

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 create tool with all-optional parameters, no output schema, and destructiveHint=true, the description is minimally adequate: it says what is created and that contacts are optional. It omits what the call returns, whether an empty-name customer is valid, and how duplicates are handled.

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 coverage is only 50% (first_name and last_name have no descriptions), and the description does not compensate: it merely repeats the contact types that the schema enum already enumerates, and adds nothing about the two undocumented name fields. The description therefore adds no meaning beyond the schema.

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 ('create a customer') plus the notable payload element ('optional contacts'), which separates it by verb from siblings like enchant_get_customer, enchant_update_customer and enchant_list_customers. It never names a sibling explicitly, so it falls short of a 5.

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?

The 'WRITE:' prefix signals a mutation, but there is no when-to-use guidance, no statement of prerequisites, and no contrast with enchant_update_customer or enchant_add_customer_contact. An agent must infer the selection rule purely from the verb.

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