report

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=False. Description adds value by detailing the output format (JSON string with synthesized data or error) and explaining that data is synthesized from raw account/customer data.

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?

Description is concise and well-structured: bold intro, context paragraph, bullet list of operations, then Args and Returns sections. Every sentence is informative with no redundancy.

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 tool's simplicity (one required parameter), annotations, and presence of output schema, the description covers purpose, operations, output format, and source limitation comprehensively.

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 one parameter 'operation' with no enum or description. Description compensates by listing the three valid values (business_summary, account_balances, customer_balances), adding crucial meaning for correct invocation.

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 synthesizes financial summaries from Wave data. It lists three specific operations (business_summary, account_balances, customer_balances) and distinguishes itself from sibling tools like account, item, party, reference, transaction by focusing on reports.

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?

Description explains that Wave has no report API, so this tool fills that gap using raw data. It provides clear context for when to use, but does not explicitly state when not to use or mention alternatives.

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