gerent365_search_customers

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden. It discloses which fields are searched but omits behavioral details like case sensitivity, partial match behavior, result limits, sorting, or return format. This is a significant gap for a search tool.

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?

The description is a single, front-loaded sentence that conveys the core purpose and scope with no unnecessary words. It effectively uses the parenthetical to list searchable fields.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (one parameter, no output schema), the description is minimally viable for invocation. However, it does not explain what the tool returns (e.g., full customer objects, IDs, pagination), leaving some ambiguity.

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 already describes q as 'search term' with 100% coverage. The description adds value by explaining that the term matches name, phone, and email, providing useful context 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?

The description clearly states the tool searches customers by text and specifies the fields (name, phone, email). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_customers (which likely lists all) and create/update_customer.

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 usage is implied by the description: use it when you need to find customers by name/phone/email. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or mention alternatives such as list_customers for retrieving all customers.

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