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

Annotations already mark destructiveHint=true, but the description adds that it stops delivery and issues no refund, providing behavioral context beyond the annotation flags. No contradiction with 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?

First paragraph is concise and front-loaded with purpose. The second paragraph contains SAP MCP execution guidance, which adds necessary context for tool invocation (paid tool, routing) but is somewhat verbose. Overall efficient.

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 (2 params, output schema exists), the description covers the core purpose and usage. However, it omits explicit prerequisites (session must be active) and potential error states, leaving minor gaps. Adequate but not exhaustive.

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% with clear descriptions for both parameters (sessionId and reason). The description does not add extra meaning beyond what the schema provides, so 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?

Description clearly states the tool closes an active premium session, stopping stream and webhook delivery. It uses a specific verb ('closes') and resource, and distinguishes itself from siblings like sap_premium_activate_session by describing the stop action.

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?

Provides explicit usage context: 'Use this when the buyer wants to stop delivery before the unit quota is exhausted.' It also clarifies that no refund is issued, guiding the agent on when to invoke. However, it does not mention when not to use or compare to alternatives beyond the implicit distinction.

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