GetAbapAST

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

The description explicitly marks the tool as '[read-only]', which signals no side effects. It also states the output format ('JSON AST'). Since annotations are absent, the description adequately covers behavioral traits for a simple parse operation.

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 a single, well-structured sentence. It front-loads the read-only nature, uses clear verb-object structure, and defines the acronym AST. Every word contributes to understanding.

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 tool with one required parameter and no output schema, the description covers input, operation, and output format. It doesn't address error handling or size limits, but these are not critical for understanding core functionality.

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?

With 100% schema coverage, the input schema already describes the 'code' parameter. The description does not add further detail beyond rephrasing the schema, so it meets but does not exceed the baseline.

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 purpose: parsing ABAP code and returning an AST in JSON format. It uses precise verbs ('Parse', 'return') and specifies the resource ('ABAP code', 'AST'). Among many sibling 'Get' tools, it uniquely identifies its function without confusion.

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 the tool is for obtaining an AST from ABAP code, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives like GetAbapSemanticAnalysis or GetAbapSystemSymbols. No when-not or conditions are provided.

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