Delete estimate

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and readOnlyHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The word 'Permanently' reinforces irreversibility but adds little beyond the annotation; nothing is said about side effects on linked invoices, payments, or permissions. That is adequate but thin for a destructive operation.

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?

One short, front-loaded sentence with no redundant wording; the destructive nature is stated immediately. Nothing in it is filler.

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 tool with a full annotation set and no output schema, the description is minimally sufficient to call it. However, a destructive estimate operation would benefit from noting constraints such as acceptance/conversion state or cascading effects, which are absent.

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?

There is a single parameter with 100% schema description coverage, so the schema already carries the semantic load. The description adds no format, sourcing, or validation hints beyond what the schema states.

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 a specific verb and resource ('Permanently delete an estimate'), which lets an agent distinguish it from sibling deletion tools such as wave_delete_estimate_payment and wave_delete_invoice. It does not explicitly name those siblings or state scope limits, so it falls short of a 5.

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, no prerequisites (e.g., whether an accepted or converted estimate can be deleted), and no pointer to alternatives like wave_update_estimate or archive-style operations. The agent must infer everything about timing from the tool name.

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