abap_debug_vars

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

With readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, annotations already cover safety. The description adds valuable behavioral context by disclosing that complex values are returned as abap_debug_value stubs rather than fully expanded, which is meaningful for an agent deciding next steps.

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 with no filler. It front-loads the core function and tacks on the key behavioral caveat about complex-value stubs, earning its place with zero redundancy.

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?

For a read-only survey tool with one required parameter and a rich schema, the description covers the essential behavior and return-value format. It could mention pagination or ordering, but given the annotations and the sibling abap_debug_value for expansions, it is sufficiently complete.

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 all parameters (scope, filter, stateId) already described in the schema. The description adds no additional parameter-level semantics beyond the overall behavior, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 surveys every variable in scope at a debugger stop, which is a specific verb-noun pairing. It also hints at differentiation from abap_debug_value by mentioning complex values return as stubs, though it doesn't explicitly name the sibling in the description.

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 phrase 'at a debugger stop' gives clear contextual timing for use, and the stub mention implies that abap_debug_value should be used for expanding complex values. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or name alternatives beyond the subtle stub reference.

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