sherweb_customers_get

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavior, and it does reveal a meaningful non-obvious trait: Sherweb has no direct get endpoint, so this tool reads the whole collection and selects the match. However, it does not cover failure behavior, return format, or whether additional processing or errors should be expected.

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 short sentences, with the core purpose first and a valuable implementation note second. 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?

For a single-parameter read tool, the description covers what the tool does and why it works through the collection. It does not describe the return value or not-found behavior, but no output schema exists and the overall complexity is low enough that these are moderate, not critical, gaps.

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 100%, with customerId already documented as the customer's unique UUID. The description's 'by ID' wording only restates this, adding no new parameter semantics beyond what the schema provides.

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 is a specific verb+resource statement: 'Get one customer by ID.' It also distinguishes this from the sibling list tool by using 'one ... by ID' and explains that Sherweb only exposes customers as a collection, so the tool selects from that list.

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 phrase 'by ID' implies the tool should be used when a single customer identifier is known, but it never explicitly names the alternative list tool or says when to prefer it. Usage guidance is therefore conveyed by implication rather than explicit when/when-not direction.

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