auto_tag_customer

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

With no annotations, the description must fully disclose behavior. It mentions AI analysis and tag suggestion but does not explain how the AI works, whether it modifies customer data, or what the output looks like. The parameters imply summary capabilities unrelated to tagging, creating confusion.

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 a single sentence, which is concise, but it includes a placeholder '[query]' and lacks structure (e.g., bullet points or sections). It is adequate but not well-formed.

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 8 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is incomplete. It fails to explain how parameters like summary_type, days, and hours relate to the tagging purpose, leaving the agent unsure of the tool's actual capabilities.

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 coverage is 100% with descriptions for all 8 parameters. The tool description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema, so baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 it auto-tags customers with AI by analyzing the conversation, which is a clear purpose. However, the input schema includes parameters like summary_type, days, hours, and target_language that suggest the tool may also perform summarization or translation, creating a mismatch. It does not differentiate from siblings like 'add_customer_tag'.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'add_customer_tag' or 'update_customer_tags'. There are no context signals or exclusions mentioned.

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