mailchimp_customers

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

Discloses action-specific behaviors: 'list' returns customers with orders_count and total_spent, while 'details' returns a full customer record and requires customer_id. Since no annotations are provided, the description carries the transparency burden, and it adequately conveys a read-only operation.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose, then breaks down the action variants. No redundancy or unnecessary detail.

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 tool with five parameters and no output schema, the description provides enough context to select and invoke it correctly, including action-specific outputs and prerequisites. Minor omissions like response structure or pagination are offset by thorough schema descriptions.

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 descriptions cover all parameters (100% coverage), but the tool description enriches the 'action' parameter by detailing what each enum value returns and clarifies the dependency of 'customer_id' for the 'details' action, adding value beyond the schema.

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 identifies the tool as retrieving e-commerce customers for a specific store, with specific fields (order counts, lifetime spend). It distinguishes from sibling tools like mailchimp_members (audience) and mailchimp_products by focusing on store customers, making it unique.

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?

Gives clear context for when to use: when you need customers for a store. Does not explicitly exclude alternatives or state when not to use, but the purpose is specific enough that a user can infer applicability. Lacks explicit sibling comparisons.

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