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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true. The description adds behavioral details: pagination behavior, sorting options, and cursor/filter interaction. Could mention error responses or rate limits, but the provided context is sufficient.

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 well-structured sentences with front-loaded purpose, pagination details, and an important warning in caps. No wasted words.

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?

Explains the return format ({ customers }), covers all filter types, sorting, pagination, and cursor constraint. Lacks output schema but describes response adequately. Does not mention edge cases like empty results, but overall complete for a list tool.

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?

The schema provides 100% coverage with parameter descriptions. The description adds value by summarizing filter types and explaining the critical cursor condition, which is not fully captured in 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?

The description clearly states it lists customers with optional filters and sorting, and returns { customers }. It specifies the REST endpoint. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling list tools like recharge_list_addresses, though the resource name makes it clear.

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?

Provides clear instructions on pagination (cursor-based, limit, max 250), and emphasizes the critical constraint that when using cursor, all other filters must be omitted. Does not compare to sibling tools, but that is less necessary as resources differ.

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