mcp-abap-adt

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It states 'Retrieve' and 'Supports reading,' implying a read-only operation, but doesn't disclose behavioral traits such as required permissions, rate limits, error handling, or what the output looks like (e.g., format or structure). This leaves significant gaps for a tool with no annotation coverage.

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 two sentences with zero waste—front-loaded with the core purpose and followed by a key capability. Every word earns its place, making it highly efficient and well-structured.

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 complexity (retrieving ABAP function group definitions) and lack of annotations and output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't cover what the tool returns, potential side effects, or error conditions, which are critical for effective use in a development context.

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 both parameters. The description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema provides (e.g., it doesn't explain parameter interactions or usage nuances). Baseline 3 is appropriate as the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 verb ('Retrieve') and resource ('ABAP function group definition'), making the purpose specific. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'ReadFunctionGroup' or 'GetFunctionModule', which appear to serve similar retrieval functions in the same domain.

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 provides implied usage guidance by mentioning support for 'active or inactive version,' which suggests when to choose between these options. However, it offers no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'ReadFunctionGroup' or other 'Get' tools, nor does it mention prerequisites or exclusions.

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