Get Customer

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description only adds the API endpoint, which is a minor behavioral detail. It does not disclose return format, error behaviors, or any constraints beyond what annotations and schema already provide.

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, concise sentence that immediately states the action, resource, and endpoint. It front-loads the core purpose with no wasted words. Every word earns its place.

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 simple get-by-ID tool with strong annotations, the description is minimally viable. However, there is no output schema, so the description could be expected to mention what it returns (e.g., the customer object). It doesn't, but the tool name and endpoint strongly imply the outcome. This is adequate but with a clear 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 description coverage is 0%. The description mentions 'por ID' but that only restates the parameter name 'id' and the tool name. The schema already provides format and pattern. The description does not meaningfully compensate for the low schema coverage or add semantic detail beyond what is self-evident.

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 clearly states 'Obtém cliente por ID' (gets customer by ID) with the specific endpoint /v1/customers/{id}. This is a specific verb+resource+scope that distinguishes it from sibling tools like create_customer, list_customers, and update_customer.

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 usage context is implied: use when you need a customer by ID. However, there is no explicit guidance on when not to use it or mention of alternatives such as list_customers for collections or update_customer for modifications. The endpoint provides a clear context, but no exclusions or alternatives are stated.

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