Search Customers

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

Annotations already indicate the tool is read-only and idempotent. The description adds that it returns 'matching customer records with contact details' which is slightly more specific, but it does not detail match types or result structure beyond what the schema provides.

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 sentences. First sentence states the core action and searchable fields. Second sentence provides usage context. No wasted words, front-loaded with key information.

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 description covers the main purpose, return type, and usage scenario linking to a sibling tool. However, it does not describe the output structure (e.g., list of customers) or that pagination parameters exist, though the schema covers those. Given 8 optional parameters and no output schema, it is mostly complete.

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 100%, so baseline is 3. The description mentions search by name, phone, email, or address but does not add significant meaning beyond what the parameter descriptions already state (e.g., partial vs exact match).

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 ('Search') and resource ('customers'), lists searchable fields (name, phone, email, address), and distinguishes itself from siblings like 'get_customer_jobs' by stating it returns customer records with contact details.

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 tells when to use: 'Use this to look up customer information or find the exact customer name for use with get_customer_jobs.' This provides clear guidance and references a sibling tool, though it could also mention when not to use it.

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