get_customer

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

With no annotations, the description must reveal behavior on its own. It conveys that the operation is a read and includes billing/shipping/credit details, but it does not mention the select parameter's effect, payload size, access permissions, or error behavior. It adds some value but is not fully transparent.

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 a single, well-structured sentence that immediately states the action and target, with no filler or redundant information. It earns its place entirely.

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 low-complexity tool with only two parameters and no output schema, the description adequately conveys the core purpose and the kind of information returned. It could mention how the select parameter shapes the response or specify error behavior, but these are optional for a simple get-by-ID operation.

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 input schema already documents both parameters fully (e.g., customerID example and select's comma-separated format). The description adds no additional parameter-level semantics beyond implying 'full detail' when select is omitted, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 identifies the tool as retrieving a specific Acumatica customer with full detail (billing, shipping, credit info). The verb 'Get' and the resource 'specific customer' distinguish it from the list-oriented query_customers sibling, so the purpose is unambiguous.

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 word 'specific' implies the tool is for individual customer lookups rather than bulk queries, but no explicit comparison to query_customers or other alternatives is given. It provides context but leaves exclusions and alternatives to the user's inference.

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