Update a customer

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

Annotations already indicate idempotentHint=true and destructiveHint=false, which the description supports. The description adds behavioral context like 'two-way CRM sync friendly' and the clearing trick. No contradictions, and it discloses mutability without overstating.

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 concise with four sentences that front-load the purpose and add specific context. It avoids redundancy and earns its length, though the first sentence repeats the title.

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 12 parameters and no output schema, the description covers the core purpose and two specific details (clear service area, nested address). However, it lacks explanation of partial update semantics (replaces all mutable fields vs. only provided ones) and does not mention return values or error conditions, leaving some gaps.

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 schema already documents all parameters. The description adds value by explaining the nested address object and the service_area_id clearing behavior, improving clarity beyond the schema definitions.

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 'Update a customer' and 'Replaces mutable fields on a customer record', using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like createCustomer and deleteCustomer, and adds context about two-way CRM sync, making the purpose very clear.

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 provides clear context for when to use this tool (update existing records, push changes from external system), including a specific tip for clearing service_area_id. However, it does not explicitly exclude when not to use or mention alternatives beyond the sibling context.

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