GetDdlVersionSource

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

The description includes '[read-only]' to indicate safety. Since no annotations are provided, this helps. However, it does not detail return format, permissions, or potential costs. The minimal disclosure is adequate for a simple read operation but lacks depth.

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 sentence with a read-only tag. It is extremely concise, front-loaded with the key verb and resource, and contains no superfluous information.

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 (one parameter, no output schema, read-only), the description provides enough context to use it correctly. It could mention the output is ABAP DDL source, but this is implicit from the name and 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?

The schema has 100% description coverage for the only parameter. The description adds context by specifying that content_uri comes from GetDdlVersions, which clarifies its provenance beyond the schema's generic description.

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 fetches the source of a specific CDS view version using a content_uri. It references GetDdlVersions as the source of the URI, which distinguishes it from similar tools like GetDdlVersions and GetDdlVersionDiff.

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 usage after GetDdlVersions to retrieve source for a specific version. It does not explicitly state when not to use or list alternatives, but the context and named sibling provide sufficient guidance.

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