getCustomer

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false, confirming it's a safe read-only operation. The description adds context about the returned customer object, enhancing transparency without contradicting annotations.

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 concise, front-loaded with the primary action, and each sentence serves a purpose: stating what it does, listing return fields, specifying usage context, and providing alternatives.

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 output schema, the description adequately describes the return fields. It also covers usage context and alternatives, making it complete for a single retrieval tool.

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 has one parameter (customer_id) with 0% description coverage. The description explains that it uniquely identifies a customer and returns their details, adding value despite the parameter's self-explanatory name.

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 that the tool retrieves a single customer by customer_id, listing the fields returned (name, contact, address, points, member rank). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like getCustomers, postCustomerPoints, and updateCustomerMembership, making its purpose 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 description explicitly states when to use this tool (to view details of a specific customer from a list) and when to use alternatives: getCustomers for conditional search, postCustomerPoints for point operations, updateCustomerMembership for membership changes, and getCustomers with member parameter for filtering by membership status.

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