SetDefaultSystem

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden and does disclose key behavior: the change is temporary, applies only to the current session, and affects all subsequent operations unless overridden. It does not cover permissions, error behavior for unconfigured systems, or whether the previous default is restored after the session.

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 three tightly written sentences with no waste. It front-loads the core action and then adds the most important behavioral notes in descending priority.

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 simple one-parameter setter with no output schema, the description is nearly complete because it states session scope and override behavior. It could mention what happens when system_id is invalid or not configured, but the schema already covers the configuration requirement.

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%, so the single required parameter system_id is fully documented in the schema. The description adds no new details about system_id and instead references a 'system' parameter for overrides, which is not present in this tool's schema.

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 a specific verb and resource: 'Change the active SAP system at runtime.' It clearly distinguishes this setter from the many read/export/create siblings in the toolset, so an agent can identify its unique action.

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?

It explains the effect on subsequent operations and the session-scoped override, which implies when to use it. However, it does not explicitly state when to choose this tool over alternatives or any conditions under which it should not be used.

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