update_store_customer

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

Description adds behavioral context beyond annotations: max 10 concurrent requests, respects read-only and dry-run modes, and confirms partial update behavior. Annotations are basic, so description carries the burden well.

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?

Well-structured with a clear first sentence, followed by behavior, context, authentication, and parameter list. Slightly verbose but no redundant information. Could be slightly more compact.

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?

Covers all aspects: purpose, when to use, parameters, authentication, returns (JSON with updated customer object), and safety (dry-run). Output schema exists, so no need to detail return values further.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description fully explains each parameter: store_id, customer_id, additional_fields (dict of fields), and account (optional, with usage instructions and reference to list_accounts). This compensates completely for the schema gap.

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 verb ('Update'), the resource ('store customer'), and the specific fields (name, opt-in status, address, company). It also clarifies partial update behavior and distinguishes itself from related tools like create_store_customer and delete_store_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?

Provides context about when to use this tool (manual writes for custom/headless storefronts) vs automated sync. Mentions authentication and concurrency limits. However, it does not explicitly name an alternative tool for other scenarios.

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