Check SAP MCP Runtime Status

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true, so the description does not need to repeat these. The description adds that it is 'free' and 'machine-readable', which are useful behavioral traits beyond annotations.

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 that are front-loaded with the core purpose and then detailed use cases. Every sentence adds value with no 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?

Given the tool's simplicity, presence of output schema, and robust annotations, the description covers all necessary context: readiness, routing, cost, and use cases. No gaps remain.

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 input schema fully describes the intent parameter with enum and description, so the description doesn't need to add much. The description mentions routing summary but does not explicitly tie it to the parameter. Baseline 3 applies due to high schema coverage.

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?

Description clearly states it's a 'readyness and routing summary' and lists specific use cases like 'are you connected?' and paid/write readiness. It distinguishes from other tools by saying 'without dumping the whole tool catalog', which helps differentiate from sap_agent_next_action or similar tools.

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?

Explicitly states when to use: for checking connectivity, paid/write readiness, local profile visibility, and next actions. Implicitly tells when not to use (when you need full catalog), providing clear guidance.

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