mcp-abap-adt

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

With no annotations, the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It mentions the multi-step process, implying mutation and system changes, but lacks critical details: required permissions, whether changes are reversible, error handling, or what 'verify' entails. For a complex creation tool with 13 parameters, this is insufficient.

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, efficient sentence that front-loads the core purpose. However, it could be more structured by separating the step list for clarity, but it avoids unnecessary verbosity.

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?

For a complex creation tool with 13 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It omits behavioral details like side effects, error conditions, and output format, leaving significant gaps for an AI agent to understand tool behavior.

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 fully documents all parameters. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond implying the tool handles all required steps, which doesn't clarify individual parameters. Baseline 3 is appropriate as the schema carries the burden.

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 the specific action ('Create a new ABAP domain') and resource ('in SAP system'), and distinguishes from siblings by detailing the multi-step process ('lock, create, check, unlock, activate, and verify'), which is unique among creation tools like CreateTable or CreateClass.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like CreateDataElement or CreateStructure is provided. The description lists steps but does not specify prerequisites, dependencies, or scenarios where this tool is appropriate versus other domain-related tools like UpdateDomain or GetDomain.

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