get_business_partner

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

With no annotations available, the description must carry the behavioral disclosure burden. It states that the tool returns full details by default and that $expand can include related data, which is useful. However, it does not address response format, error behavior, or the effect of combining select and expand.

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 two sentences with no filler. It front-loads the primary purpose and then provides the most relevant optional-use guidance, so every sentence earns its place.

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 simple single-resource retrieval tool, the description is largely complete: it identifies the target resource, notes the return behavior, and covers the expand option. It could be more explicit about select usage and the exact response shape, but with a fully documented schema and a clear sibling contrast, nothing critical is missing.

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 the baseline is 3. The description adds value by clarifying that $expand includes related data like addresses and roles, and by framing the id as targeting a specific business partner. This goes slightly beyond the schema's generic descriptions.

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 the tool's function: retrieving a specific business partner by ID from SAP S/4HANA. It distinguishes itself from the sibling list_business_partners by emphasizing a single, specific entity rather than a collection.

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?

The description implies when to use this tool (when a specific business partner ID is known) rather than listing business partners. It also provides guidance on using $expand to include related data, but it does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention the sibling alternative by name.

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