sap_list_transports

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. The verb 'Lists' communicates the read-only nature, and the description adds useful scoping context ('open', 'of the logged-on user'). However, it does not disclose the response format, empty-result behavior, or whether an active SAP connection is required.

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?

A single nine-word sentence with the verb and resource front-loaded. There is no filler, redundancy, or repeated schema information. Every word earns its place.

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 parameterless list tool, the description covers the essentials: the action, the resource type, and the scope. Nothing needed to invoke the tool correctly is missing. The only gap is the lack of connection to the broader transport workflow (e.g., feeding sap_release_transport), which would help selection but not invocation.

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?

The tool takes zero parameters (schema properties: {}), so the baseline of 4 applies. There is no parameter information the description needs to add since nothing is required to invoke the tool.

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 ('Lists'), a specific resource ('open transport requests'), and a clear scope ('of the logged-on user'). The 'open' qualifier and user scoping differentiate it from siblings like sap_release_transport and sap_search_objects without needing to inspect schemas.

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?

No explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance is provided, and no alternative tools are named. The closest sibling, sap_release_transport, operates on the same domain (transports), but the description does not suggest using this tool to discover transports before releasing them. Usage is implied by the name and description but never stated.

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