DeleteFunctionInclude

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It warns that the backend rejects function module includes and mentions transport request behavior. However, it does not describe whether the deletion is permanent, the impact on dependent objects, or any authorization requirements.

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 only two sentences, with no wasted words. The key action and the most important caveat are front-loaded, making it quick to parse.

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 no output schema and moderate complexity (deletion with a special case), the description covers the essential purpose, a critical limitation, and optional transport usage. It could add information about reversibility or authorization, but overall it is sufficient for an agent to understand when and why to use this tool.

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 schema already documents all parameters. The description adds value by contextualizing the transport request with 'optional for $TMP objects' and the note about function module includes, which clarifies when deletion is not possible.

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 action (delete), the resource (ABAP function group include), and the system context (SAP system). It distinguishes from siblings like DeleteFunctionGroup and DeleteFunctionModule by noting that function module includes require a different tool (Function Builder).

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 provides when to use (deleting function group includes) and a clear exclusion (function module includes must be deleted via Function Builder). It also mentions transport request optionality for $TMP objects but does not explicitly compare to other sibling deletion tools or state prerequisites.

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