List sub-customers

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the bar is lower, but the description still adds value: it discloses the prerequisite account type and previews the returned fields (subscription status and channel connectivity). It does not cover pagination or result size limits, which for a list operation would have been useful.

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?

Two tight sentences, front-loaded with the purpose and followed by the prerequisite. The trailing clause 'a ChatPush client that may create sub-clients through the API' is slightly circular but not wasteful.

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 a one-parameter read-only list tool with no output schema, the description covers purpose, returned fields, and the account prerequisite — enough for correct invocation. The only gap is that token masking (the one parameter's effect) is left entirely to the schema.

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% and the sole parameter include_tokens is fully documented in the schema, so the baseline is 3. The description does not mention the token-masking behavior at all, so it adds nothing beyond what the schema already provides.

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 uses a specific verb and resource ('List the sub-clients of your ChatPush multi-customer account') and names the fields returned (subscription status, WhatsApp/Telegram connectivity). It is clearly distinct in intent from the singular get_sub_customer and create_sub_customer siblings, though it never names them explicitly.

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?

It gives a qualifying condition — the account must be multi-customer — which helps an agent decide applicability. However, it offers no explicit guidance on when to prefer this over get_sub_customer for a single record, and no exclusions or fallback behavior is described.

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