DeleteStructure

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

With no annotations, the description carries full behavioral disclosure burden. It adds a valuable detail: 'Includes deletion check before actual deletion', signaling that the tool performs a safety precondition check. It also clarifies transport request behavior. No contradictions with annotations (none present).

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 covering purpose, behavioral detail, and parameter nuance. Every clause serves a purpose with no redundant information. It front-loades the primary action and follows with key caveats.

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's simplicity (two parameters, no output schema) and the presence of a deletion check, the description is mostly complete. It could optionally mention that the deletion is permanent, but the behavioral transparency already conveys a check, implying a destructive action is taken. The context signals show low complexity, so a 4 is appropriate.

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 context beyond the schema: it provides an example for structure_name (Z_MY_STRUCTURE) and elaborates on transport_request's conditional requirement (required for transportable objects, optional for $TMP). This exceeds mere schema repetition.

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 'Delete an ABAP structure from the SAP system', which is a specific verb-resource pair. The sibling tools include many other Delete* tools (e.g., DeleteClass, DeleteTable), so this unambiguous resource differentiation is essential.

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 explains that a transport request is optional for $TMP objects (implying required otherwise), which provides basic usage context. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool vs alternatives like DeleteClass or DeleteTable, relying solely on the resource name for differentiation.

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