GetAbapSemanticAnalysis

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses read-only nature and return contents (symbols, types, scopes, dependencies), which is helpful. However, it lacks details on performance, limitations, or side effects beyond what is implied.

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?

Single sentence, front-loads the read-only nature, and efficiently conveys purpose and outputs. No wasted words.

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?

No output schema, so description must explain return value. It lists key outputs (symbols, types, scopes, dependencies) but omits format or structure details. Adequate for high-level understanding, but could be more precise.

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 coverage is 100% with clear parameter descriptions. The description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema—e.g., does not explain the filePath output format or behavior. Baseline 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?

The description clearly states the tool performs semantic analysis on ABAP code, returning specific outputs (symbols, types, scopes, dependencies). It distinguishes from siblings like GetAbapAST (which returns AST) and GetAbapSystemSymbols (returns system symbols).

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., GetAbapAST, GetAbapSystemSymbols). The [read-only] tag hints at safety but doesn't specify context or exclusions.

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