teamleader_projects_add_customer

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits, but it does not. It fails to mention whether the operation is idempotent, what happens if the customer is already linked, or any required project state. It also provides no information about errors or return values.

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, concise sentence that conveys the core purpose without unnecessary words. It is well-structured and front-loaded.

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 the simple nature of the operation and the presence of a clear schema with enumerated values, the description is minimally adequate. However, with no annotations and no output schema, more detail on expected behavior or side effects would improve completeness.

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%, so the description must compensate. It clarifies that customer_type is contact/company (already in the enum) and that the target is a 'nextgen-project', but it does not explicitly map 'id' to project id or explain 'customer_id'. The parameter meanings are mostly left to inference from the tool name.

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: linking a customer (contact or company) to a nextgen project. It specifies the verb ('Koppel') and the resource ('klant aan een nextgen-project'), and distinguishes from sibling tools like add_deal or remove_customer.

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 usage through the action phrase but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives, nor does it mention exclusions or prerequisites. The sibling context suggests it is one of several project-relationship tools, but no guidance is given.

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