Get customer

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

The annotations already establish read-only, idempotent, non-destructive behavior. The description adds valuable context beyond that by disclosing that deleted customers are still returned and flagged with deleted: true, although it does not cover not-found behavior or permission requirements.

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 tight sentences with no filler. The included fields are front-loaded, followed by the important deleted-customer behavior.

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 single-customer lookup with two fully documented parameters and no output schema, the description supplies enough information about returned content and deleted records. Only edge-case behavior such as not-found handling is left implicit.

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%, and the schema already explains both the id and businessId parameters. The description reinforces ID-based retrieval but adds no additional syntax or meaning 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 states that this returns one customer and enumerates the content included: address, shipping details, notes, and outstanding/overdue amounts. This clearly distinguishes it from a broader list operation, though it does not explicitly name wave_list_customers as the alternative.

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 retrieval by ID because it mentions deleted customers still being returned by ID, but it gives no explicit guidance on when to use this versus wave_list_customers or wave_get_context. No prerequisites or exclusions are stated.

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