get_top_customers

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

No annotations are provided, so the description partially compensates by disclosing the selection metric (revenue) and the time period. However, it omits details like sort order, aggregation logic, or data freshness, leaving some ambiguity.

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 two sentences plus an example, front-loaded with the core action. Every sentence earns its place with 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 the simple tool (2 params, no output schema), the description explains purpose, usage, and provides an example. It does not explicitly state the return format (e.g., customer names and revenue amounts), which would be helpful without an output schema, but the overall context is sufficient for most agents.

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 schema already covers both parameters with clear descriptions (defaults and enum). The description adds an example ('top 10 clientes') that implicitly maps to the limit parameter, but no extra semantic depth 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 clearly states it lists the best customers by revenue over a period, using specific verbs and scope. It distinguishes itself from siblings like get_customer_profile (single customer) and get_inactive_customers (churn).

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?

It explicitly says to use for identifying VIPs, retention, and exclusive offers, giving clear context. It does not mention alternatives or exclusions, but the use cases are well-defined.

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