list_customers

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 useful behavior beyond that: the exact fields returned (order_count, purchased_amount, reward_point, tags, last_order_at), which matters since there is no output schema. It is silent on pagination defaults, though the schema covers page/limit.

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?

Three tight sentences, zero filler: purpose first, parameter hint second, return shape third, alternative last. Every sentence carries distinct information.

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 explicit return-field list is exactly what an agent needs to interpret results, and the find_customer pointer closes the routing question. Nothing essential for correct invocation is missing.

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 three parameters are already documented. The description's 'Pass term to search by name/phone/email' largely restates the schema's term description rather than adding new semantics. Baseline 3 applies when the schema does the heavy lifting.

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?

States a concrete verb+resource ('List/search the site's customers') and explicitly frames two modes (browse vs. segment). It also names the sibling it is not (find_customer), so an agent can distinguish it without opening another schema.

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?

Names the alternative (find_customer) and the exact condition that selects it ('exact id/phone/email lookup') versus this tool's keyword search. Both when-to-use and the sibling routing are explicit.

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