sherweb_customers_list

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden for behavioral disclosure. It states that the tool returns a list of customers with specific fields, which implies a read-only operation, but it does not explicitly disclose that it is non-destructive or mention any potential side effects, limitations, or pagination behavior. This is adequate but leaves some room for detail.

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, succinct sentence that immediately conveys the action and the resource. It includes all essential information about the returned fields without any fluff or repetition, making it efficiently front-loaded and easy to parse.

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 list operation with a single optional parameter, the description is complete: it states what the tool does, who it applies to (service provider account), and what data is returned. No output schema exists, so the description adequately specifies the return fields, and there are no missing details that would hinder an agent from invoking the tool correctly.

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 schema description coverage is 100% and already fully documents the 'search' parameter, including its optionality and local application. The tool description does not add any additional meaning or context about the parameter, so it remains at the baseline score for this dimension.

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 uses a specific verb 'List' and clearly identifies the resource: customers under the service provider account. It enumerates the returned fields (display name, ID, hierarchy path, suspension state, company contact info), which precisely distinguishes it from related tools like sherweb_customers_get (which likely fetches a single customer) and other billing 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 clearly indicates the tool is for listing all customers, providing context for when to use it. However, it does not explicitly exclude alternatives or mention when to use a sibling like sherweb_customers_get. This falls short of an explicit 'when/when-not' but is clear enough for an agent to infer the intended use.

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