Build SAP Escrow V2 Deposit Transaction

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

Discloses that the builder is unsigned, does not submit, and is not signed by hosted SAP MCP. Advises to preview before finalizing. No contradiction with annotations (readOnlyHint=false is consistent). Adds context 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?

Concise, front-loaded with purpose, then usage, then warning. Every sentence is meaningful without redundancy. Well-structured for quick understanding.

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 presence of an output schema and 100% parameter schema coverage, the description covers all necessary aspects: what the tool does, how to use it, and the expected next step. No gaps.

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 coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description does not add additional meaning beyond the schema definitions for the four parameters. No extra semantic enrichment.

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 it is a 'hosted-safe unsigned builder for deposit_escrow_v2' and explains it adds funds to an existing V2 escrow. It distinguishes from sibling builders by specifying the use case: adding funds and then finalizing locally with sap_payments_finalize_transaction.

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?

Explicit guidance on when to use ('when a hosted workflow needs to add funds to an existing V2 escrow') and what to do after ('finalize locally with sap_payments_finalize_transaction'). Also includes a clear warning against creating temporary signing scripts or reading keypair JSON.

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