GetView

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the ability to read active or inactive versions, but does not mention any other behavioral traits like return format, required permissions, or side effects. The description adds some value but is minimal.

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 two concise sentences with no unnecessary words. It is front-loaded with the core action and includes a key behavioral detail.

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?

The tool has no output schema, and the description does not describe the return value (e.g., whether it's source code or metadata). For a retrieval tool, this is a gap. However, the low complexity and clear name make the description minimally 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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the description does not need to add much. It re-emphasizes the version parameter's meaning (deployed vs modified), which aligns with the schema. This adds marginal value beyond the schema, resulting in a baseline score of 3.

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 retrieves an ABAP view definition, using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like ActivateView or CreateView by focusing on retrieval, and the version support adds specificity.

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 indicates the tool is for retrieving view definitions and mentions version support, but does not explicitly state when to use it versus other retrieval tools (e.g., GetTable). However, the context of sibling tools makes its purpose clear.

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