get_customer

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

No annotations provided, so the description carries the disclosure burden. The ['tier: readonly-owner'] tag hints at read-only, owner-scoped access, and the REST endpoint mapping is helpful. However, it doesn't describe what happens if the customer doesn't exist (404 behavior), pagination, or response structure beyond what the endpoint implies.

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 sentences, compact and efficient. The endpooint mapping and tier tag add useful metadata. No waste, though the tier tag could arguably belong in annotations rather than description.

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 single-parameter read tool, the description is reasonable but sparse. It lacks explicit behavior on not-found cases, authentication requirements, and doesn't explain what the response contains. Given no output schema and no annotations, more detail could be warranted, though simplicity helps.

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 0% and there's one required parameter (customer_id) that has no description in the schema and no elaboration in the tool description. The description names the endpoint but doesn't explain the format, constraints, or semantics of customer_id beyond it being an identifier.

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?

Description states 'Get a single customer by ID' with a specific verb+resource and maps to an explicit REST endpoint. It distinguishes itself from siblings like 'list_customers' and 'get_customer_address' by focusing on a single customer fetch, though it doesn't explicitly differentiate from get_customer_address beyond the obvious resource.

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 '[tier: readonly-owner]' tag implies safe read usage and the operation semantics imply when to fetch a customer by ID. However, there's no explicit when-to-use vs alternatives guidance, no mention of when to prefer list_customers, and no exclusion criteria.

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