bos_customer_loyalty_summary

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

No annotations provided. The description states 'Get', implying a read operation, but does not disclose any behavioral traits such as whether it is read-only, requires auth, or what the summary contains. No details on potential side effects or safety.

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 sentence, which is concise but lacks necessary elaboration. It is front-loaded with the action, but the brevity sacrifices completeness for conciseness.

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?

Given no output schema and simple parameter, the description is incomplete. It does not specify what the summary includes (e.g., total points, tier, expiration) or any edge cases, making it insufficient for an agent to know what to expect.

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 input schema has one required string parameter 'customer_id' with 0% coverage (no schema descriptions). The description does not add any meaning, such as format, source, or examples, leaving the parameter minimally defined.

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 states the action 'Get' and the resource 'loyalty points summary' for a customer. It distinguishes from sibling tools like bos_loyalty_points_balance (current balance), bos_loyalty_points_history (transactions), bos_loyalty_earn/redeem (operations), and bos_loyalty_tiers (levels).

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like balance or history. The description does not provide context on when a summary is appropriate over other loyalty tools.

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