UpdateFunctionGroup

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 a key behavioral trait: 'Uses stateful session with proper lock/unlock mechanism.' This informs the agent about session and locking requirements, which is valuable. It could additionally describe the response or error handling, but the disclosure is sufficient.

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 composed of two direct sentences. The first sentence states the purpose, and the second adds behavioral context. Every sentence is informative and necessary, with no extraneous information.

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 (updating a single metadata field with three well-documented parameters) and no output schema, the description covers the essential aspects: what it does, the nature of the resource, and the stateful mechanism. It could mention the response format, but overall it is adequately 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?

The input schema has 100% description coverage, meaning the schema already explains each parameter. The description does not add significant extra meaning beyond the schema. According to guidelines, baseline is 3 when schema coverage is high, which is the case here.

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 'update' and the resource 'ABAP function group', specifying that it updates metadata (description). It also distinguishes from other tools by explaining that function groups are containers for function modules and don't have source code to update directly, which separates it from tools like UpdateFunctionModule or CreateFunctionGroup.

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 implicitly provides usage guidance by indicating that this tool is for metadata updates only, not source code, which differentiates it from other tools. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives or when not to use it, though the context is clear.

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