Add a new customer to Shopmonkey with contact and address details. Input customer name, street, city, state, and ZIP to create a customer record.
Create a new customer in Shopmonkey.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| zip | No | ZIP code | |
| city | No | City | |
| state | No | State | |
| address | No | Street address | |
| lastName | No | Customer last name | |
| firstName | No | Customer first name |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.1.1Input schema / properties / emailRemoved value: -{
- "description": "Customer email address",
- "type": "string"
-}Input schema / properties / phoneRemoved value: -{
- "description": "Customer phone number",
- "type": "string"
-}v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description alone must convey behavioral expectations. It only states 'Create' with no mention of side effects, validation, error conditions, or idempotency, offering minimal transparency beyond the action itself.
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, direct sentence that is perfectly concise. It uses no unnecessary words and immediately conveys the tool's purpose.
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 such a simple create operation, the description is adequate but lacks details about the expected response (e.g., created customer ID) and any prerequisites such as uniqueness checks. The absence of an output schema increases the need for this context, which is not provided.
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?
All six parameters are described in the schema (100% coverage), so the baseline is 3. The description adds no extra meaning to the parameters, relying entirely on the already clear field names and short descriptions.
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 action (Create), the target resource (a new customer), and the context (in Shopmonkey). It effectively distinguishes this from sibling tools like update_customer and search_customers.
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?
No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention checking for existing customers before creating, nor when to prefer create over update, leaving the agent without explicit usage direction.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.