product_customer_segment

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

No annotations provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses routing and auth scoping but fails to state whether the action is read-only or mutating, side effects, or rate limits. Behavioral traits beyond the basic routing are absent.

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 short and to the point, with three clear sections: action identification, routing context, and parameter descriptions. No unnecessary words, but could be slightly more structured.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (running a domain agent action), the description omits critical context: what the action returns (output schema exists but not described), prerequisites, or practical examples. The agent would struggle to use this tool effectively without more information.

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 0%, so description must compensate. It describes 'message' as 'free-text objective' and 'inputs' as 'optional JSON string', adding meaning beyond the schema's title and default. However, it lacks specifics like expected JSON structure or constraints.

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 it runs the 'customer_segment' action in the product domain, differentiating it from sibling tools like commerce_customer_segment. However, it does not explain what the action accomplishes, leaving the purpose somewhat vague.

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 mentions routing through a dispatcher with JWT/tenant/company scope, which is authentication context, not usage guidance. There is no indication of when to use this tool vs alternatives like commerce_customer_segment or when not to use it.

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