get_field_values

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

With no annotations, the description must fully disclose behavior. It states it fetches options but omits details like read-only nature, distinctness, or error handling. While the input schema covers parameters, the description itself adds minimal behavioral context beyond the core function.

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 sentences efficiently convey the tool's purpose and usage. Every word earns its place; no redundancy or fluff.

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 tool's complexity (5 params, no output schema), the description ties the tool to sibling 'execute_odata_query' and explains the value-help concept. However, it omits the return format (array of value-label pairs) and pagination behavior of the 'top' parameter, leaving some ambiguity for an agent.

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?

All 5 parameters have descriptions in the input schema (100% coverage), so the description's mention of 'entity set that acts as the value-help source and the target field name' adds no new semantic meaning. It restates schema info without deepening parameter understanding.

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 verb ('Fetches') and resource ('dropdown and value-list options from a SAP S/4HANA OData entity'). It effectively distinguishes itself from siblings like 'execute_odata_query' and 'get_entity_metadata' by focusing on value discovery before writing.

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 explicitly directs when to use the tool ('before writing data with execute_odata_query') and provides actionable guidance on how to provide the entity set and target field. This fulfills a high standard of usage context.

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