Inspect ABAP Runtime Dump

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, covering the safety profile. The description adds 'normalize' but doesn't explain what normalization entails, such as output structure or side effects. No contradiction with annotations.

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, front-loaded sentence ('Read and normalize one ABAP runtime dump.') with no redundant words or filler.

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 description is minimal but sufficient to identify its core function. However, with 7 parameters and no parameter guidance, plus no usage distinction from siblings, the definition is not fully complete for correct invocation, despite the presence of an output schema.

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 provides no parameter explanations. Parameters like 'offset' vs 'startIndex' and 'includeFullContent' remain ambiguous; the schema only lists types and defaults, leaving the description to compensate, which it fails to do.

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 uses specific action verbs 'Read and normalize' and identifies the resource 'one ABAP runtime dump.' It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like sap.runtime.dump.list by focusing on a single dump.

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 implies usage for inspecting a specific runtime dump but does not explicitly state when to prefer this over alternatives, nor does it mention any exclusions or when-not cases. Sibling tools like sap.runtime.dump.list are not referenced.

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