Wave: Get Estimate

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true, so the agent knows it's a safe read operation. The description adds concrete details on what is returned (line items, deposits, acceptance history), which provides useful behavioral context beyond the annotations. No contradictions.

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 sentence that is front-loaded with the purpose and scope. Every word is necessary and no extraneous information is present.

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 has 6 parameters (most with defaults), no output schema, and clear annotations, the description adequately explains the tool's function. It covers the key elements returned. The missing return format details are covered by the schema's response_format parameter.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents all 6 parameters. The description mentions 'line items, deposits, and acceptance history,' which aligns with parameters like include_history, include_attachments, include_deposit_payments, but does not add new meaning beyond the schema. 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 explicitly states the action ('Get'), the resource ('one estimate'), and the scope ('in full: line items, deposits, and acceptance history'). It clearly distinguishes from siblings like wave_list_estimates (list) and wave_get_estimate_payment (payment-specific).

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 for retrieving full details of a single estimate, but does not explicitly provide when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., wave_list_estimates for listing, wave_get_estimate_payment for payment info). No when-not-to-use or selection criteria are given.

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