SAPSearch

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

Descriptions of modes and parameter behavior (e.g., BOR objects appear as SOBJ, source parameter options for tadir_lookup) add behavioral context beyond the readOnlyHint annotation. No contradictions; all described behaviors are read-only.

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?

Very concise yet comprehensive. Uses numbered modes and tips. Every sentence adds value; no redundant or irrelevant content. Front-loaded with main purpose and then details.

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?

For a complex tool with 7 optional parameters and no output schema, the description sufficiently explains usage modes, parameter interdependencies, and return field semantics (uri, objectType). Refers to other tools for further actions, ensuring an agent can use it correctly.

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 adds valuable context: explains how query parameter applies to both modes, restrictions on source parameter, and relationships between objectType and objectTypes for different search modes. This goes beyond schema descriptions but does not cover every edge case.

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?

Clearly states the tool searches for ABAP objects, exact TADIR entries, or source code. Distinguishes between object search and tadir_lookup modes, and explicitly contrasts with sibling tools like SAPQuery and SAPRead.

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?

Provides explicit when-to-use guidance: object search for name patterns, tadir_lookup for exact cross-package lookup. Advises preferring tadir_lookup over long SAPQuery IN-lists. Also references alternatives for field name searches (SAPRead, SAPQuery).

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