GetIncludesList

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

The description discloses it is read-only via '[read-only]' and mentions recursion. However, with no annotations provided, the description should cover more behavioral traits such as authorization requirements, performance implications, depth limits, and error handling. The current disclosure is minimal but sufficient for a simple list 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 sentence that is concise and directly states the tool's purpose. It is front-loaded with the read-only label and recursion. Every word contributes to the meaning, though it could benefit from slight expansion on usage context.

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 no output schema, the description would benefit from indicating the return format (e.g., list of include names or objects). The tool's complexity is low, but details like pagination or handling of non-existent objects are missing. It is adequate but not 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%, so the input schema already describes all parameters well. The description itself adds no extra meaning beyond the schema, such as examples or relationships between parameters. The schema and description together provide adequate parameter understanding.

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 recursively discovers and lists all include files within an ABAP program or include. The verb 'discover and list' combined with 'ALL include files' is specific, and the tool name GetIncludesList aligns well. It distinguishes from sibling tools like GetInclude (which likely fetches a single include).

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?

No guidance is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., GetInclude for a single include, or other getters). There is no mention of prerequisites, limitations, or when not to use it. The description only states what it does without context.

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