Preview RAP Generation

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. However, the description adds little beyond these annotations; 'shared RAP generator capability' is too vague to disclose concrete behavioral traits like whether changes are applied or what the output represents.

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 sentence and is concise in length, but the phrase 'through the shared RAP generator capability' is wordy and obscure. It lacks any structured explanation, though it is not overly verbose.

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 tool has a complex nested schema and an output schema, but the description is too sparse to contextualize the operation. It does not explain how the preview relates to actual generation, what the output represents, or what inputs are required, which is a critical gap for a high-complexity tool.

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 0%, and the description does not mention any of the eight parameters or their semantics. The description does not compensate for the missing schema descriptions, so an agent cannot understand what 'systemId', 'generatorId', 'content', and other parameters mean beyond their names.

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 'Preview RAP Generation' which identifies a clear verb and resource, but the phrase 'through the shared RAP generator capability' is vague and does not clarify what 'preview' actually produces. It does not explicitly distinguish this from the sibling tool 'sap.rap.generate' beyond the word 'preview'.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like sap.rap.generate or sap.rap.validate. There is no mention of use cases, prerequisites, or exclusions, leaving the agent without any context for tool selection.

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