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

readOnlyHint=true already establishes that this is a safe read, and the description usefully discloses that some fields (field_values, credit_balance, sms_account) are deferred and require expand. It does not, however, mention pagination behavior, defaults, or result volume despite being a list endpoint with page/page_size.

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?

Three tight sentences: purpose, filter inventory, and the expand caveat, front-loaded with the core purpose. Efficient, though the endpoint reference (TeamUp: GET /customers) is of limited value to an agent choosing a tool.

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 13-parameter read-only list tool with a full schema and no output schema, the description covers purpose, filter taxonomy, and deferred fields adequately. The notable omission is pagination behavior, which the agent must infer from the schema alone.

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 all 13 parameters are already documented in the schema, setting the baseline at 3. The description's mapping of filters to categories and its note on expand adds only marginal value beyond what the schema already states.

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 combination (search and list) and resource (business's customers, clarifying members and leads), plus enumerates the filter dimensions. An agent can easily distinguish this from the singular get_customer or the write-oriented create_customer sibling.

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 'search and list' framing and the filter inventory, but it never states when to prefer this over get_customer (single lookup) or how it relates to siblings like list_customer_memberships. No explicit when-not guidance is given.

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