get_installations_by_customer

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

No annotations are present, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only mentions the filtering action but does not explain whether the match is exact, how pagination works, or any side effects or permissions. This falls short compared to the burden placed on the description.

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?

A single sentence with no redundant words, front-loading the core purpose. It is appropriately sized for the simple functionality it describes.

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 filtered-list tool with robust schema coverage, the description is adequate but not fully complete. It does not explicitly mention that the result is a list of installations or clarify edge cases like empty results or exact-matching behavior, which would be useful.

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?

The input schema already provides clear descriptions for all parameters (customer_nbr, limit, offset), achieving 100% coverage. The description adds minimal value beyond restating that customer_nbr is used for filtering, so a baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 states a specific action ('filter') and resource ('installations') with the exact filter criterion ('customer number'). This clearly differentiates it from sibling tools like get_installations_by_system_type and get_installations_by_product.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives such as search_installations or get_installations_by_product. The intended use case is only implied by the name and description, but no direct comparison or exclusion is provided.

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