create_customer

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

The description discloses the write nature ('Create') and adds a key behavioral constraint: email must be unique. It also mentions the 'fields' parameter to limit the response, providing some insight into output behavior. However, it does not detail error handling or what the default response contains.

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 two short sentences, front-loaded with the primary purpose. Each sentence adds meaningful information: the first explains what it does, the second covers key constraints and parameter hints. No redundant or filler 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?

There is no output schema, so agents would need to understand the return value from the description. While the 'fields' parameter hint suggests a response can be customized, the description does not explicitly state what is returned by default. The nested billing/shipping objects are not explained, but the schema provides their property details. The description is adequate but leaves some gaps.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds extra meaning for the 'email' parameter by specifying it must be unique, which is not in the schema. It also reinforces the purpose of the 'fields' parameter. Other parameters (billing, shipping) receive no additional explanation, but the overall value exceeds the baseline.

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') and resource ('a new customer account'), making it distinct from sibling tools like create_product or create_coupon. The verb+resource pairing is unambiguous and differentiates it from other create tools.

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 description implies usage when creating a new customer but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like update_customer. It mentions the email uniqueness requirement, which is a constraint, but lacks clear exclusions or comparison to other tools.

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