getCustomerReferralsCount

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. '🔒 Get count' reveals nothing about side effects, required permissions, return format, or limits. The lock emoji suggests security but is not informative.

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 extremely short, but this is under-specification rather than conciseness. A single vague phrase with an emoji does not earn the space; it occupies space without providing useful information.

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?

Even for a simple count tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description is grossly incomplete. It fails to state the entity being counted, the relationship to the customer ID, or any return details, leaving the agent to infer everything from the name.

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 has one required parameter customerId with no description, and schema description coverage is 0%. The description does not mention customerId or add any meaning to help the agent understand what to pass or why.

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 'Get count' is a tautology that only restates the 'Count' part of the tool name without specifying what resource is being counted. It lacks a clear verb-object-resource structure and fails to distinguish from siblings like getCustomerReferrals.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. Sibling tools like getCustomerReferrals exist, but the description gives no context for choosing the count variant over the list variant.

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