ABAP-ADT-API MCP-Server

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It states 'retrieves' which implies a read-only operation, but doesn't disclose any behavioral traits such as authentication needs, rate limits, what format the definitions are returned in, or whether this is a simple lookup or complex query. The description is minimal and lacks operational context.

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 zero wasted words. It's appropriately sized for a simple retrieval tool and front-loads the core purpose immediately.

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 has no parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is minimally complete but leaves significant gaps. It doesn't explain what annotation definitions are, what they're used for, or what the return format looks like. For a retrieval tool in a complex system with many siblings, more context would be helpful.

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 has 0 parameters with 100% schema description coverage (empty schema). The description doesn't need to explain any parameters, and it correctly implies no inputs are required. A baseline of 4 is appropriate since there are no parameters to document.

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 annotation definitions' clearly states the action (retrieves) and resource (annotation definitions), but it's somewhat vague about what annotation definitions are in this context. It doesn't distinguish this tool from its many siblings, which include various retrieval operations like getObjectSource, objectStructure, and ddicElement.

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. With 99 sibling tools including many that retrieve metadata or definitions (e.g., findDefinition, objectTypes, featureDetails), the description offers no context about prerequisites, typical use cases, or what makes this tool unique.

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