request_customer_merge

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavior. It mentions combining order history and addresses, but it fails to disclose that the source customer will be deleted, the operation is likely irreversible, or that this is a 'request' (possibly async). These are important side effects for an agent to understand before invoking.

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, front-loaded sentence that directly states the action and scope. It is concise with no wasted words.

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 absence of an output schema and annotations, the description should provide more context about return values, side effects, and the request nature of the operation. It does not explain what the response looks like or that this may be an asynchronous request, leaving the agent underinformed.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds context about what merging does (combines order history, addresses) but does not add parameter-specific meaning beyond what the schema already states about source and target customer IDs.

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 the action ('Merge one customer into another') with the resource (customers) and scope (combines order history, addresses, etc.). It distinguishes from sibling tools like delete_customer and update_customer by emphasizing the merging behavior.

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 implies the tool should be used when you want to combine two customer records, but it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or provide alternatives. There is no comparison with related tools such as delete_customer or get_customer_merge_requests.

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