GetClassUsages

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden; it does disclose the deprecation lifecycle and imminent removal, which is valuable behavioral context. However, it says nothing about permissions, whether it still functions identically to the successor, error behavior, or result shape for a read operation.

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?

Two short sentences with the deprecation warning front-loaded and bracketed, so an agent sees the critical routing information before anything else. No wasted text.

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 single-parameter, read-only tool with no output schema and no annotations, the definition supplies what an agent most needs: what it does and what to use instead. It could add one clause on whether the deprecated tool still returns the same data as GetObjectUsages, but nothing essential is missing.

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 100% for the single class_name parameter, so the schema already documents the input fully. The description adds no format, naming, or scoping detail beyond what the schema provides, making the baseline 3 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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Retrieve usages for an ABAP class') and immediately names the successor tool GetObjectUsages, so an agent can distinguish it from siblings like GetClass or GetObjectUsages without opening the schema.

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?

Gives explicit when-not guidance ('DEPRECATED - Use GetObjectUsages instead' plus 'will be removed in a future version') and names the exact alternative to use in its place, which is the strongest possible routing guidance for a deprecated tool.

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