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

readOnlyHint=true already signals a safe read, so the bar is lower. The description adds genuinely useful behavior: offset paging semantics (pass next_offset, null = last page) and the underlying endpoint. It does not mention the 'deleted' default (active only) or page-size limits, which would be the higher-value additions.

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: searchable fields first, then the paging rule, then the endpoint. Every sentence carries information and nothing is repeated from the schema.

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 10-param, no-output-schema search tool, the description covers the main filtering and paging story including what next_offset means on return. It leaves the 'deleted' toggle and result-shape/fields unaddressed, which an agent would want before deciding how to page or whether deleted records appear.

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 low at 30%, and the description compensates by naming most filterable fields (email, names, company, phone, mobile, customer_code) and explaining the offset chaining pattern. It omits deleted and page_size, so not fully compensating.

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 ('Find') and resource ('customers') and enumerates the searchable fields. It implicitly separates search-by-field from the sibling list_customers, though it never names that alternative 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?

The enumerated fields imply when to use this over list_customers, and the paging note tells the agent how to paginate, but there is no explicit 'use X instead when...' guidance or statement of prerequisites.

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