find_customer

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so safety is covered. The description adds nothing behavioral beyond that: it does not say whether a missing customer errors or returns empty, whether ID/phone/email matching is exact, or whether multiple matches are possible. With no output schema, that gap matters.

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; the lookup keys are listed immediately after the verb. It is efficient, though thin rather than deliberately minimal.

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 two-parameter read tool with full schema coverage and a safety annotation, the description is minimally sufficient. It leaves unaddressed the key behavioral question an agent faces: what a lookup returns when nothing matches or when phone/email formats vary.

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% and the 'by' enum documents the three accepted fields, so the schema does the heavy lifting. The description merely restates those same keys without adding format or matching-semantics detail, which is baseline 3.

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?

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 and no mention of alternatives such as list_customers for browsing or a search tool. The agent must infer that this is a single-record exact-match lookup rather than a filtered list.

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