linear_getCustomerStatuses

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

Annotations already declare the tool as read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive, ensuring the agent understands it's safe. The description adds no further behavioral context, such as rate limits, pagination, or what happens if no statuses exist. With annotations covering the safety profile, a score of 3 is appropriate.

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 at just five words, but it may be too terse to provide adequate clarity. While brevity is good, it sacrifices informative structure; a slightly longer description could improve understanding without being verbose.

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 that the tool has three optional parameters, an output schema, and clear annotations, the description fails to explain the broader context of what customer statuses are or how they relate to other customer entities. The agent lacks information about the purpose of statuses and typical usage patterns, leaving the description incomplete.

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 100% description coverage for all three parameters, so the schema itself documents their meaning. The description does not add any additional insight or context beyond what the schema already provides, meeting the baseline but not exceeding it.

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 'get' and the resource 'customer statuses', and indicates the source 'from Linear'. However, it does not distinguish this tool from similar siblings like 'linear_getCustomerTiers' or provide a precise definition of what customer statuses are.

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 compared to alternatives such as 'linear_getCustomers' or 'linear_getCustomerById'. There is no mention of use cases, prerequisites, or when not to use it.

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