List Customers

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, openWorldHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the description adds 'optional search and pagination' as minor behavioral context. However, it does not disclose deeper behaviors such as rate limits, response structure, or the fact that openWorldHint suggests the list may be incomplete.

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 sentence that packs the essential action, resource, and key options without any redundant words. It is front-loaded and easy to scan.

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 simple list tool with only one required parameter and strong annotations, the description is largely sufficient. It covers the core operation; though there is no output schema, the return type (list of customers) is implicit. The description could mention that the 'store' parameter should reference a store from 'store_list', but that is already in the parameter schema. Overall, no critical gap for this complexity level.

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%, with each parameter already well-documented (e.g., 'limit', 'query', 'store', 'cursor', 'response_format'). The description only refers to 'optional search and pagination', which slightly emphasizes but does not add meaning beyond the schema. Baseline 3 applies given complete schema coverage.

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 the verb 'list' targeting the resource 'customers' within 'a Shopify store', immediately distinguishing it from sibling tools like 'customer_get' or 'product_list'. It also notes optional search and pagination, adding useful scope.

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 description implies usage for fetching multiple customers, mentioning optional search and pagination, but it does not explicitly state when to use this over alternatives like 'customer_get' for a single customer. No exclusions or prerequisites are provided, leaving usage to be inferred.

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