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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the upstream endpoint mapping (GET /customers), which is mildly useful, but it says nothing about pagination limits, default page size, result caps, or auth scoping — real behavioral traits for a 7-param list endpoint.

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 tight sentences with no wasted wording; the resource and search behavior are front-loaded and the endpoint reference is appended compactly. It is efficient, though the endpoint line is reference detail rather than agent-facing guidance.

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 7-parameter, zero-required list tool with no output schema, the description does not describe the shape of the returned customer list or how to page through it, and gives no default sort/page-size behavior. It is adequate but leaves meaningful gaps for an agent constructing a multi-page query.

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 seven parameters are already documented in the schema. The description restates `q`'s search targets (name, email, mobile, address) without adding syntax or format detail, and it is silent on page, page_size, expand, sort_by and sort_direction. Baseline 3 is appropriate when the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 pair and resource ('List or search customers') and names the returned fields (phone numbers, tags, addresses), so the agent knows what this returns. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from the sibling housecall_get_customer, so sibling differentiation is only implicit.

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 description implies the search use case via `q`, but gives no explicit when-to-use guidance: nothing says to prefer this over housecall_get_customer for a single record, and there is no guidance on paging (page/page_size) or when to use `expand`.

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