Get customer

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

Beyond the annotations, the description reveals important behavioral details: unknown IDs return ok=false with status 404, and the response includes the current SyncToken. It also confirms the operation is read-only. These traits add decision-relevant context that annotations alone do not provide.

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?

Three sentences each carry distinct value: the first defines scope and return contents, the second gives the use case, and the third covers behavior and alternatives. No filler or redundancy; the critical error condition is front-loaded near the end where it complements the usage guidance.

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?

The tool is simple (one parameter, no nested objects) and has both an output schema and comprehensive annotations. The description covers the return scope, the SyncToken dependency, and the 404 error path. Nothing needed for correct invocation is missing.

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%, so the baseline is 3. The parameter description already explains that customer_id is the numeric QuickBooks Id, not the display name, and describes its provenance. The tool description reinforces this but does not add meaning 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 uses a specific verb ('Read') and names the exact resource ('one customer by QuickBooks Id'), then enumerates what is returned: contact details, billing address, open balance, and SyncToken. It clearly differentiates from sibling tools like list_customers and search_customers by emphasizing single-record retrieval by ID.

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 explicitly states when to use this tool: to inspect a customer and to obtain the SyncToken required by update_customer and delete_customer. It also gives an exclusion by directing the agent to search_customers or list_customers when the Id is unknown, so the agent knows not to call get_customer blindly.

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