Wave: List Customers

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

Annotations declare readOnly, idempotent, and non-destructive. The description adds valuable behavioral details: local filtering for name_contains, pagination with fetch_all, and sorting options, without contradicting annotations.

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?

Two concise, front-loaded sentences that first state the core purpose, then provide critical usage nuance. Every sentence adds value without 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 no output schema, the description covers the key return aspect (balances). It also addresses pagination, filtering, sorting, and output format. While it could mention default behavior for missing parameters, it is sufficiently complete for a list tool with rich schema descriptions.

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 coverage is 100% with descriptions for all 10 parameters. The description adds extra context beyond the schema, such as the interaction between name_contains and fetch_all, and the exact email matching, which helps the agent choose correct parameter combinations.

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 clearly states it lists customers with outstanding and overdue balances. It distinguishes from sibling tools by detailing specific filtering behaviors (email exact, name_contains local) and pagination nuances.

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 gives explicit guidance on when to use fetch_all=true with name_contains for large lists, and implies that email is an exact filter. It does not explicitly list alternatives but provides enough context for proper usage.

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