get_customer

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

Annotations are absent, so the description must disclose behavior. It only states 'readonly-owner' tier and API mapping, but does not describe side effects, authentication requirements, rate limits, or error scenarios. Minimal behavioral context is provided.

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 very short (10 words) and front-loads the core purpose. However, it may be too terse, missing some helpful details. Overall, it is concise but at the expense of completeness.

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 the tool's simplicity (1 required param, no output schema, no annotations), the description covers the basic function and REST mapping. However, it lacks information on return values, error handling, or usage examples. It is minimally complete for a simple getter.

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 coverage is 0%, so the description should compensate. It adds that the parameter 'id' identifies the customer, but this is only implicit. No details on format, constraints, or default values. The schema already requires a string, and the description barely augments it.

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 'Get a customer by ID' with a specific verb and resource. The API mapping and tier add context. Sibling tools have distinct resource names, so differentiation is implicit.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of prerequisites, exclusions, or when-not-to-use. For example, it doesn't say 'use get_user for users' or 'do not use if you need a list of customers'.

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