GetFunctionGroupVersionDiff

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

The description adds a '[read-only]' tag, indicating the operation is safe with no side effects, which is valuable given no annotations are provided. However, it does not detail the output format of the diff or any other behavioral aspects such as permissions or size limits, leaving some gaps.

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, concise sentence with a front-loaded '[read-only]' tag. It efficiently communicates the tool's purpose and key constraint without unnecessary words.

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), the description adequately explains what the tool does and how to get the parameters. However, it does not describe the return format or any caveats, which would make it fully complete.

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 descriptions already specifying the parameters as 'Opaque content_uri of the OLD/base version' and similar. The tool description reinforces that these come from GetFunctionGroupVersions but adds minimal new semantic value 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 tool computes a unified diff between two ABAP function group versions, using content_uris from GetFunctionGroupVersions. The verb 'Compute' and resource 'unified diff between two ABAP function group versions' are specific, and the mention of content_uris differentiates it from sibling diff tools for other 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 context by specifying that content_uris must come from GetFunctionGroupVersions entries. It does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or list alternatives, but the object type is clear and contrasts with sibling diff tools for other ABAP objects.

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