Read SAP ADT Discovery

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

Annotations already declare the tool is read-only, non-destructive, idempotent, and open-world. The description adds that it reads 'summary or full' data, which provides useful context beyond the schema. No contradictions.

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?

One sentence, 14 words, every word informs. It is appropriately concise and front-loaded with the action and scope.

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?

Given the simple read-only operation, existing annotations, and available output schema, the description is sufficient. It covers the core action and key parameter semantics without needing to explain return values (covered by 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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description compensates by indicating that 'summary or full' corresponds to detailLevel and 'one configured SAP system' corresponds to systemId. It doesn't explain ADT discovery jargon but provides enough linking to the parameters.

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 a specific verb ('Read') and resource ('ADT discovery data') and scopes it to 'one configured SAP system'. It clearly distinguishes from siblings like sap.system.inspect (inspect system) and sap.system.discovery.export (export data).

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 clearly implies usage: reading discovery data for a specified system. It doesn't explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the context is unambiguous. It's not misleading.

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