wave_search_customers

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only states the search criteria without explaining behavior like case sensitivity, fuzzy matching, pagination, or what happens on no results. This is insufficient for an AI agent to fully understand the tool's behavior.

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 one short sentence with no unnecessary words. It is front-loaded with the key action. However, it is very brief and could benefit from a bit more detail without losing conciseness.

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 sibling tools and the parameter schema, the description provides enough context to differentiate from listing or getting specific customers. However, the lack of an output schema means the agent does not know the return format, but for a search tool, this is acceptable.

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 has 100% description coverage for parameters (limit, query, businessId). The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema already provides, so a 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 'Search customers by name or email' clearly states the action (search), resource (customers), and search criteria (name or email). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'wave_list_customers' (list all) and 'wave_get_customer' (get specific customer).

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 usage when a query (name or email) is available, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives like wave_list_customers or wave_get_customer. No 'when to use' or 'when not to use' guidance is provided.

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