Find customers by name

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds matching behavior (substring, case-insensitive, three searched fields), which is genuinely useful, but says nothing about result capping or scanning limits beyond what the schema already encodes.

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?

Two sentences, no filler, matching semantics front-loaded and the intended outcome (obtaining a CustomerID) trailing. Every clause 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?

With no output schema, the description usefully signals the key return value ('get a CustomerID'), and annotations cover safety. It does not explain result shape, ordering or how limit interacts with maxPages scanning, which a search tool returning capped matches would benefit from.

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 schema itself documents the query string, limit and maxPages defaults carefully. The description's 'contains the query (case-insensitive)' largely restates the query field description, adding case-insensitivity but no format guidance beyond the schema. Baseline 3 applies when the schema does the heavy lifting.

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?

States a specific verb and resource (search customers) plus the exact matching semantics: name, domain or business number, case-insensitive substring. That distinguishes it in spirit from get_customer (ID lookup) and list_customers (unfiltered list), though no sibling is named explicitly, which keeps it short of a 5.

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 sentence 'Use it to get a CustomerID from a company name' gives one concrete use case, so usage is implied rather than spelled out. It never names alternatives (get_customer, list_customers, find_contacts) or states when this tool is the wrong choice.

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