List customers

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is fully covered by structured data. The description adds essentially nothing beyond that: no mention of default page size, pagination semantics, ordering, or what a response looks like, so it does not enrich the behavioral picture.

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?

It is short and front-loaded, but the first two sentences ('List customers.' / 'List your customers.') are redundant restatements of the name, so there is minor wasted space.

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 read-only collection tool with full schema documentation and no output schema, the description covers the core purpose and the primary filter use case. Gaps around pagination behavior and return shape are real but modest given the annotation and schema richness.

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%, including the nested created date filter and both cursors, so the schema fully documents all five parameters. The description's email mention is consistent but adds no syntax or meaning beyond what the schema already provides, making the baseline 3 appropriate.

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 states a specific verb and resource ('List customers'), which is enough to distinguish it from the many payment, invoice, and subscription list tools. It does not, however, differentiate itself from its closest sibling get_customer, so an agent must infer that this returns a collection rather than a single object.

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?

'Filter by email to find a customer you created earlier' gives an implied when-to-use for the email filter, but there is no explicit guidance on when to prefer this over get_customer or why one would page through customers. The usage context is present but thin.

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