SearchObject

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 does disclose a real behavioral trait: startLine/maxLines page the returned textual XML, not just raw line numbers. However, it never states that the operation is read-only, how results are ordered, or what happens when no matches are found, leaving only partial disclosure.

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 short sentences with no filler. The main purpose is front-loaded, and the remaining sentence provides only the essential pagination/limit details, so 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?

The schema is fully documented and the description covers the key pagination/limit behavior, but for a tool with no output schema it omits usage context (when to choose this vs specific getters) and doesn't describe empty-result or error behavior. Adequate for basic invocation but with clear gaps.

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?

The input schema already documents all four parameters with descriptions, so the baseline is 3. The description adds meaningful semantics by tying startLine/maxLines to pagination of the textual XML output and clarifying that maxResults caps the number of matches, which goes slightly beyond the schema's individual parameter 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 action ('Search') and resource ('ABAP objects'), and 'quick search' conveys a broad lookup distinct from the specific object getters listed among siblings. It doesn't explicitly name an alternative, but the verb+resource scope is unambiguous.

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 is given on when to use this tool versus the many specific object getters (GetProgram, GetClass, GetInterface, etc.) or any exclusions. The usage context must be inferred from the tool name and sibling list, which is not enough for an agent to reliably route its choice.

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