get_business_for_customer

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

Without annotations, the burden falls on the description. It merely states 'get' (implied read), but discloses no behavioral traits such as error handling, rate limits, or what happens if the customer_id is invalid. The output schema is not described.

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 and thus concise, but it sacrifices necessary detail. For a one-parameter tool with 0% schema coverage, more information is needed to be effective.

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 simplicity (1 param, output schema present) and many siblings, the description is incomplete. It fails to explain what a 'business record' contains, typical use cases, or how it relates to the customer, leaving ambiguity for tool selection.

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 0%, yet the description adds no information about the 'customer_id' parameter. It doesn't explain format, source, or constraints beyond the schema's type string, failing to compensate for the lack of schema descriptions.

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 'Get the business record for a customer' clearly states the action (get) and the resource (business record), and it distinguishes the tool from siblings like 'get_customer' (which retrieves customer data) and 'create_business' (which creates, not retrieves).

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, no prerequisites (e.g., customer must exist, business must be associated), and no exclusions. It lacks context for decision-making.

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