add_customer_note

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only states the basic function (add note, notify users) but does not reveal whether the note appends or replaces, notification guarantees, rate limits, or any destructive implications. The description is minimal.

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?

Two concise sentences. The first covers the primary purpose and optional behavior; the second provides the API mapping. No redundant information.

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 no output schema and low schema coverage, the description should provide more context. It lacks details on return values, error handling, and prerequisite conditions. However, the tool is relatively simple, so the description meets a minimum viable level.

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 low (33%): only 'notify_user_ids' has a description. The description mentions optional notification, which corresponds to that parameter, but it does not clarify the format of 'content' or the source of 'customer_id'. No additional parameter semantics are provided beyond the schema.

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 explicitly states the action (add a note), the resource (customer timeline), and maps to the REST endpoint. It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools which handle companies, users, and customer CRUD, not notes.

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 implies the tool is for adding a note and optionally notifying users, but it does not provide explicit guidance on when to use it over possible alternatives. There is no mention of prerequisites or conditions for using this tool.

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