DeleteTable

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

The description adds behavioral insight by mentioning a 'deletion check before actual deletion', but beyond that, it does not disclose other traits such as permissions required, irreversibility, or error handling. With no annotations, the description partially fulfills the transparency burden.

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?

Two sentences are efficient and front-loaded with the main purpose. No redundant information; every word adds value.

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 delete tool with no output schema, the description lacks details about return values, success/failure behavior, or what happens if the table does not exist. It covers parameters adequately but misses broader behavioral context.

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% with both parameters described. The description adds minimal extra meaning beyond the schema, only clarifying the transport request optionality for $TMP objects. Baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 an ABAP table') and the specific resource ('ABAP table from the SAP system'). It distinguishes from sibling tools by targeting tables specifically, among many other delete tools for different object types.

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 context about transport request optionality for $TMP objects, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool vs alternatives (e.g., DeleteStructure). No when-not-to-use guidance or exclusions are given.

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