list_customers

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the disclosure burden. "Lista e pesquisa" implies a non-mutating read, and the pagination mention is useful, but it says nothing about auth/permission requirements, rate limits, default page behavior, or return shape for a 6-parameter list endpoint.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence with no filler. It is efficient, though extremely terse given the parameters and lack of annotations.

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 6-parameter list endpoint with no output schema, the description is thin: it does not indicate the response structure, default ordering, or how filters combine. The rich schema compensates for parameter documentation but the description leaves gaps an agent would want filled.

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 100%, so the schema already documents all six parameters including the offset/limit defaults and maximum. The description's offset/limit reference adds nothing beyond the schema; 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?

States a specific verb pair ("Lista e pesquisa" / lists and searches) plus the resource ("clientes cadastrados") and notes pagination scope. An agent can tell it retrieves/filters customers, but the description does not name or distinguish any sibling (e.g. create_customer, list_payments).

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?

No when-to-use guidance, no alternatives named, and no conditions for choosing this over create_customer or list_payments. The only hint of usage is the parenthetical pagination note, which comes from the schema anyway.

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