List all customers

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, openWorldHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is fully covered structurally. The description adds only the fact that results are paginated, without explaining cursor semantics, default ordering, or result limits — modest added value against an already-covered safety profile.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler or redundancy. It is efficient, though its brevity means it also carries no structural guidance (ordering, pagination flow) that would earn a 5.

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 15-parameter list tool with no output schema, the description is thin: it says results are paginated but not how to page through them or what the response contains. Annotations cover safety and the schema covers filters, so it is minimally adequate rather than complete.

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 all 15 parameters — including precedence rules for email/search and the deprecation of page — are already documented in the schema. The description adds no filter, sorting, or pagination syntax beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 ('Retrieve a paginated list of customers') and scopes it to 'the authenticated workspace,' so the agent knows exactly what is returned. It does not, however, differentiate from sibling list tools (list_accounts, list_partners) or from the single-record get_customer, leaving that to the name.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance, no mention of alternatives such as get_customer for a single record, and no stated prerequisites or exclusions. The agent can only infer purpose from the name itself.

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