mercury_list_customers

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. Description discloses cursor-based pagination and return structure, which adds value beyond a simple 'list'. It does not explicitly state it is read-only but the context implies it. Adequate transparency for a list operation.

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?

Description is concise with no wasted words. It uses clear sections: purpose, use when, do not use, and returns. Every sentence contributes meaningfully.

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 annotations or output schema, the description covers purpose, usage guidelines, return format, and pagination. It is complete enough for an agent to know when and how to use the tool. Could mention read-only nature, but overall sufficient.

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 high (75%), so baseline is 3. Description adds context for 'startAfter' and 'endBefore' pagination parameters but does not explain the 'order' parameter. Overall, description adds some value but not fully comprehensive.

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 clearly states 'List Accounts Receivable customers, with cursor-based pagination.' It identifies the specific verb (list) and resource (AR customers) and distinguishes from siblings like 'mercury_list_recipients' and 'mercury_get_customer' by explicitly stating when not to use this tool.

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?

Explicitly states 'USE WHEN: enumerating AR customers before creating an invoice... or for a customer-level audit.' and 'DO NOT USE: for payment recipients... For one customer whose ID is known, prefer mercury_get_customer.' This provides clear context and alternatives.

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