get_customer_comments

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

With no annotations, the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It only states the tool retrieves comments and tags, but says nothing about side effects, data sensitivity, rate limits, or whether it is read-only. This is insufficient for a tool with multiple parameters.

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 short sentence, which is concise but borderline under-specified. It lacks structure, such as separating purpose from usage details. For a tool with 9 parameters, more explanation would be warranted.

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 the complexity (9 parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description is incomplete. It does not cover return values, pagination behavior, or the role of the query parameter. The agent is left without key context for proper invocation.

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?

Input schema has 100% parameter description coverage, so the baseline is 3. The tool description adds no further meaning beyond the generic purpose, but does not contradict the schema. It provides no examples or explanation of parameter interactions, so it remains at baseline.

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?

Description clearly states the tool gets comments and tags associated with a customer using a query. It specifies a verb (get) and resource (customer comments/tags), and distinguishes from sibling 'search_customer_comments' which implies searching rather than retrieving. However, it does not clarify if it retrieves all comments or supports filtering beyond the input 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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like search_customer_comments or other get tools. The description does not mention prerequisites, context, or exclusions, leaving the agent without decision criteria.

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