commerce_customer_profile

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

Description adds routing/scope context but no behavioral detail about side effects, mutations, destructive potential, or open-world behavior. Annotations already carry readOnly/destructive/idempotent flags, but description does not reinforce or explain them.

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?

Description is short and front-loaded with the action name, and the routing/scope sentence adds a bit of context without fluff. Could be more informative but is not verbose.

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?

The description lacks domain context, examples, intended use cases, and any explanation of what customer_profile returns or how it relates to commerce workflows. Output schema may exist, but the tool's overall purpose and invocation expectations are not conveyed.

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 description minimally explains message as 'free-text objective' and inputs as 'optional JSON string of structured inputs,' but gives no details on expected keys, format, or examples. Schema has zero parameter descriptions, so this generic gloss is insufficient to construct a correct call.

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?

Description identifies a generic 'commerce domain agent action' named customer_profile but does not state what the action actually does or what a customer profile is. It repeats the tool name rather than describing a concrete capability, and does not distinguish it from the many sibling domain-agent 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?

No guidance on when to use this tool instead of dispatch_domain_agent, invoke_tool, or other commerce/CRM tools. It only mentions routing and scope, not selection criteria or prerequisites.

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