List Wave products and services

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, openWorld and non-destructive, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds real behavioral context beyond that: only unarchived products are returned, results are name-sorted, and each record surfaces unit price, income account, and default sales taxes.

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?

Three tight sentences, front-loaded with what the tool returns, followed by the motivating use case and the fields exposed. No 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?

An output schema exists, so return-value detail is not needed here. For a simple read-only list tool with two well-documented params, the description covers scope, ordering, use case, and notable fields — nothing essential is missing.

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% and both pagination parameters are fully documented in the schema (defaults, min, max). The description adds no pagination or ordering-parameter guidance, so baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('List the products/services the business sells') plus an explicit scope qualifier ('unarchived') and ordering ('sorted by name'). This clearly separates it from siblings like wave_list_customers, wave_list_invoices, and wave_create_product.

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?

Gives a concrete use case: 'Each invoice line item needs a product id from here,' telling the agent when to reach for this tool during invoice creation. It does not explicitly name alternative tools or when-not to use it, so it stops short of a 5.

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