List Customers

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It only mentions 'paginated' as behavioral detail, omitting read-only safety, auth requirements, rate limits, and response format. The docs link may help, but the description itself is sparse.

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 two concise sentences, front-loaded with the primary purpose, followed by a useful docs link. No wasted words.

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 tool with 5 parameters and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It does not state return value structure, default page size, or sort field options, leaving an agent under-informed. The docs link compensates somewhat, but the description itself is insufficient.

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%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds the hint of 'search' which maps to extra_query, but does not meaningfully extend beyond the schema's own detailed parameter 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 clearly states the action ('List/search') and resource ('customers'), and the pagination note distinguishes it from single-customer retrieval via get_customer. However, it lacks explicit scope details like filters or whether all customers are returned.

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 paginated list/search framing implies use when multiple customers are needed, but there is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_customer or list_jobs. No exclusions or alternative recommendations are provided.

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