Get customer

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

Annotations already cover read-only, idempotent, open-world, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds substantial context beyond annotations: it itemizes returned fields, notes that uncharged bookings include past ones, and clarifies that times are in the store's time zone.

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?

It is front-loaded with a one-customer summary, then useful detail. There is some repetition between the first sentence and the 'Returns...' sentence, and the second sentence is long, but there is no empty filler.

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?

No output schema exists, so the description must carry return semantics; it does by listing contact fields, addresses, booking counts, uncharged bookings, gift cards, referral summary, and time zone. It stops short of describing the response shape or not-found behavior, so it is not fully exhaustive.

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 the baseline is 3. The description does not elaborate on customer_id beyond identifying the customer; the schema's 'from list_customers' is the only usage hint.

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 a single customer and enumerates the profile content, so the resource and scope are unambiguous. The singular 'One customer' separates it from list_customers, even though no sibling is explicitly named.

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?

There is no explicit when-to-use or when-not guidance in the description, and no sibling tool is named for comparison. The required customer_id plus the schema note 'from list_customers' implies a lookup after listing, but the description itself gives no selection criteria.

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