List customers

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive, so the safety profile is covered. The description earns credit for adding the auth requirement (manage_woocommerce), the WooCommerce dependency, and the scope boundary around guest checkouts — context the annotations cannot express.

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?

Three tight clauses: what it returns, what it excludes plus the alternative, and the operational requirements. Purpose is front-loaded and no sentence is wasted, including the return-field list which compensates for the absent output schema.

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 read-only, three-optional-parameter list tool with no output schema, the description covers everything an agent needs: scope, exclusions, the sibling alternative, required capability, and the returned fields. There is no significant gap.

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%, with page, search and per_page fully documented in the schema, so the baseline is 3. The description only gestures at the parameter surface via "plus total for paging" and adds no syntax or filtering guidance of its own.

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?

States a specific verb+resource ("list registered users with the role customer") and immediately narrows scope (guest orders excluded). It also distinguishes itself from the sibling wp_list_users by noting that tool covers every role, so an agent can route correctly without opening either schema.

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 clear context for when this is the right tool (registered customers only) and names wp_list_users as the broader alternative, which is effectively an exclusion rule. It stops short of an explicit "use X instead when..." phrasing, so a 4 rather than a 5.

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