GetDomainVersionDiff

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the behavioral burden. It adds the '[read-only]' tag, indicating no side effects, and explains the input source. However, it does not describe the output format (unified diff) beyond a brief phrase, nor does it mention limitations, errors, or performance characteristics.

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 prefixed with a '[read-only]' tag, making it concise and front-loaded with purpose. Every word is necessary, though it could be slightly more structured (e.g., bullet points) for clarity. There is no wasted text.

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?

With no output schema, the description should elaborate on the diff format (e.g., whether it returns a string, array, or structured object). It only mentions 'unified diff' without specifics. Prerequisites or error conditions are also omitted. The tool is functional but not fully self-contained for an agent to understand the return value.

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 clear descriptions for both parameters ('Opaque content_uri of the OLD/base version' and 'NEW/compare version'). The tool description adds the context that these come from GetDomainVersions, but this is already implied by the schema descriptions. Thus it adds no significant extra meaning beyond the schema.

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 verb 'Compute a unified diff', the resource 'two ABAP domain versions', and explicitly references the source tool GetDomainVersions for obtaining content_uris. This distinguishes it from other version diff tools among siblings, which are 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 implies usage by noting content_uris are 'taken from GetDomainVersions entries', indicating a prerequisite workflow. It also includes a '[read-only]' tag suggesting safe usage. However, it lacks explicit guidance on when not to use or compare to other version diff tools, though the name and context make it clear it's domain-specific.

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