abapDocumentation

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states 'retrieves' implying a read operation, but doesn't cover critical aspects like authentication needs, rate limits, error handling, or the format of returned documentation. This leaves significant gaps for a tool with 5 parameters.

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 a single, efficient sentence with no wasted words. It is appropriately sized and front-loaded, making it easy to parse quickly without unnecessary elaboration.

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 complexity of 5 parameters, 0% schema coverage, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain what the tool returns, how parameters interact, or behavioral traits, making it inadequate for effective tool invocation in this context.

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 0%, meaning none of the 5 parameters are documented in the schema. The description adds no information about parameters like 'objectUri', 'body', 'line', 'column', or 'language', failing to compensate for the lack of schema details and leaving semantics unclear.

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 'Retrieves ABAP documentation' clearly states the verb ('retrieves') and resource ('ABAP documentation'), providing a basic purpose. However, it doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like 'findDefinition' or 'ddicElement' that might also retrieve documentation-related information, making it somewhat vague in context.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description lacks context about prerequisites, specific use cases, or comparisons to siblings such as 'findDefinition' or 'codeCompletion', leaving the agent without direction on selection.

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