hcp_list_customers

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

Annotations already declare read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds real behavioral context beyond those annotations by disclosing auto-pagination and the 'unless explicit page is set' override. This gives the agent useful operational knowledge without contradicting the annotation hints.

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, both substantive. 'List customers with optional search' states the core purpose, and 'Auto-paginates unless explicit page is set' adds the most important behavioral nuance. There is no filler, repetition, or unnecessary detail.

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 read-only listing tool with an output schema and strong safety annotations, the description is mostly sufficient. It covers purpose, search capability, and pagination behavior. It falls slightly short of full completeness because it does not describe page_size behavior or clarify how search interacts with pagination, but these are minor gaps given the output schema exists.

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 successfully clarifies that 'q' is the optional search parameter and that 'page' controls pagination. However, 'page_size' is left undocumented except for its property name, and the exact search semantics or pagination defaults are not explained. Partial compensation only.

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 names the exact verb and resource: 'List customers', and adds 'optional search', which makes the intent unmistakable. It is clearly distinguishable from sibling tools like hcp_get_customer (single record fetch) and hcp_list_employees (different resource). No ambiguity remains about what operation this tool performs.

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: call this when you need a list of customers, optionally filtered by search. However, it does not explicitly state when to prefer it over alternatives like hcp_get_customer, nor does it mention any exclusions or prerequisites. The guidance is present only implicitly through the verb and resource.

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