wordpress_wc_get_customers

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. 'Get' implies a read-only operation, but the description doesn't specify what data is returned (e.g., customer fields, pagination, filters), potential rate limits, authentication requirements, or error conditions. This leaves significant gaps in understanding how the tool behaves in practice.

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 a single, efficient phrase ('Get WooCommerce customers') that front-loads the core purpose without any wasted words. It's appropriately sized for a tool with no parameters and a straightforward function.

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 lack of annotations and output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain what 'customers' entails (e.g., fields returned, format), any limitations (e.g., WooCommerce dependency), or behavioral aspects like pagination. For a retrieval tool in a complex ecosystem like WordPress/WooCommerce, more context is needed to guide effective use.

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 input schema has 0 parameters with 100% coverage, so no parameter documentation is needed. The description doesn't add parameter details, which is appropriate given the lack of parameters, earning a baseline score of 4 for not introducing unnecessary information.

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 'Get WooCommerce customers' clearly states the verb 'Get' and the resource 'WooCommerce customers', making the purpose evident. However, it doesn't distinguish this tool from sibling tools like 'wordpress_get_users' or other WooCommerce-specific tools (e.g., 'wordpress_wc_get_products'), which could cause confusion about when to use this versus general user retrieval 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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention any prerequisites, context (e.g., WooCommerce must be active), or differences from similar tools like 'wordpress_get_users', leaving the agent to infer usage based on the name alone.

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