GetTypeInfo

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

The description labels the operation as '[read-only]' and states what is returned, but omits details like error behavior (e.g., on invalid type_name), permissions needed, or potential performance considerations. Since no annotations are provided, the description carries the full burden but leaves 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 sentence that is front-loaded with '[read-only]' and efficiently communicates purpose, scope, and output with no extraneous 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?

For a simple retrieval tool with 2 parameters and no output schema, the description sufficiently covers what the tool does and returns. It lacks explicit instructions for error conditions or system prerequisites, but overall it is adequate.

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?

Both parameters have schema descriptions (100% coverage). The tool description adds value by listing supported types for 'type_name' (DOMA, DTEL, etc.) and clarifying the fallback behavior of 'include_structure_fallback', enriching the schema's meaning.

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 starts with '[read-only]' and clearly states it retrieves ABAP type information for specific object types (DOMA, DTEL, table types, structures) and lists the returned data (field definitions, value ranges, fixed values, DDIC metadata). This distinguishes it from sibling tools that perform other operations.

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 enumerates supported types (domains, data elements, etc.) implying when to use this tool, but it does not explicitly contrast with other 'Get' sibling tools like GetDataElement or GetDomain, nor does it state when to prefer this over those.

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