fortnox_list_customers

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It asserts read-only behavior, which is useful, but says nothing about pagination, the max_items cap of 500, auth requirements, or the shape of the returned list.

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 single phrase is front-loaded and free of waste, but its brevity stems from under-specification rather than disciplined conciseness. It is appropriately short for a simple list tool but omits information an agent needs.

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?

With no annotations, no output schema, an undocumented nested params object, and an unexplained max_items bound, the definition leaves an agent guessing about pagination and filtering behavior for a listing 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?

Schema description coverage is 0% and the description adds no parameter meaning. The nested 'params' object is completely opaque, and max_items is undocumented in both schema and description.

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 states a specific verb (List) and resource (Fortnox customers), so the agent knows exactly what the tool returns. It does not distinguish itself from siblings like fortnox_list_invoices beyond the resource name, but that distinction is inherent and sufficient.

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 over alternatives, nor any prerequisites, pagination context, or filtering context. The parenthetical '(read-only)' hints at safety but not usage.

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