GetCDSView

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the behavioral burden. It discloses that large views may need paging and that retrieving everything at once is possible but potentially problematic. It does not mention response format or error behavior, but 'Retrieve' implies a read operation and the paging trait is genuinely useful.

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 sentences with no filler. The core action is front-loaded, and the paging guidance is a single concise follow-up. Every sentence earns its place.

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 simple retrieval tool with three well-documented parameters, the description covers the essential action and the key paging behavior. It leaves minor gaps like return-format details, but those are largely implied by 'source code' and covered by sibling 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 baseline is 3. The description adds value by tying startLine/maxLines to a usage scenario ('For large views'), giving agents a decision rule beyond the schema's parameter-level descriptions.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Retrieve CDS view (DDL source) source code.' This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like GetTable or GetProgram, which target different object types, so an agent can easily tell what this tool operates on.

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 paging guidance ('For large views, use startLine/maxLines to page through the source instead of retrieving it all at once'), which is useful contextual usage advice. However, it does not explicitly compare this tool to alternatives or state when to choose it over sibling Get* tools.

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