WooCommerce: Update customer

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

Annotations already disclose destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=false and readOnlyHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds nothing about the most consequential unknown: whether omitted or null fields leave existing data untouched or clear it, and whether this is a full replace or a partial patch. For a destructive mutation, that gap matters, but the annotations carry most of the disclosure burden.

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 action front-loaded after the '[UNIFIED]' tag; nothing is padded. The trailing 'and other customer fields' is slightly vague but not wasteful.

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?

A destructive, non-idempotent mutation with no output schema and no schema descriptions needs the description to explain update semantics and required identifiers. It covers the field surface only, leaving merge-vs-replace behavior and site/customer_id usage unexplained.

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 0% across 7 parameters, so the description carries real weight; it names email, billing, shipping, first and last name, which maps to five of the seven parameters. It says nothing about the two required parameters (site, customer_id) or the string-typed billing/shipping payload format, so it only partially compensates.

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 ('Update an existing WooCommerce customer') and lists the kinds of fields that can change. The update/create/delete/get naming pattern lets an agent place it relative to siblings, though the description never names an alternative explicitly.

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?

Uses 'existing' as an implicit precondition, which hints that create_customer is the tool for new records, but there is no explicit when-to-use vs when-not guidance and no mention that a valid customer_id on a configured site is required.

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