Get at-risk customers

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full burden. It discloses ordering and default risk levels but omits return format (e.g., which fields are returned), pagination details beyond limit, and sorting direction. Moderate transparency.

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 extremely concise—two sentences with no wasted words. The first sentence states the core function, and the second provides a practical usage example. Perfectly structured for quick comprehension.

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?

With no output schema, the description should explain return values. It says 'list customers' but does not specify fields like customer name, ID, MRR amount, risk level, etc. For a list tool with two parameters, the description is incomplete regarding output structure. Also lacks any safety or side-effect disclosure.

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 coverage is 100% with descriptive parameter descriptions. The tool description reinforces that omitting risk_level defaults to Critical+High, which is already in the schema. No new semantic value added beyond the schema, hence baseline score.

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 action 'List customers by churn risk level' and specifies ordering by MRR at risk. It also provides a concrete usage example ('which customers are at critical/high risk?') that distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_customer_details or get_mrr_at_risk.

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 includes a clear use case ('Use to answer...') but does not explicitly state when not to use the tool or mention alternative tools. Given the sibling tools, additional guidance on exclusions would improve score.

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