Get customer

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

With the readOnlyHint annotation already indicating a safe read operation, the description adds little extra behavioral detail beyond the ID-based lookup. It does not mention what happens if the ID does not exist or the response format, but annotations lower the burden.

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, concise sentence that fully captures the tool's purpose without any superfluous words. It is front-loaded and easy to parse.

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 simple one-parameter read tool with a complete schema and readOnlyHint annotation, the description is sufficient. There is no output schema to explain, and the description clearly communicates the scope, making the tool contextually 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?

The input schema fully documents the single 'id' parameter with type and description. The description's 'by their ID' adds no additional semantic meaning beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline score of 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 uses a specific verb ('Get') and a specific resource ('a single customer'), clearly indicating the tool fetches one customer by ID. It effectively distinguishes itself from sibling tools like list_customers (retrieving multiple) and update_customer (mutating).

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?

The description implies the use case: fetch one customer when the ID is known. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it (e.g., 'use list_customers for multiple customers') or name alternatives, so it falls short of full explicit guidance.

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