Get a specific procedure from an AL object

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and openWorldHint, which cover safety and idempotency. The description adds value by specifying the exact components returned (signature, body, attributes, modifier), providing behavioral clarity beyond annotations.

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 extraneous information. The first sentence front-loads the key functionality, and the second provides context. Every word earns its place.

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 that an output schema exists (though not shown), the description does not need to detail return values. It covers purpose, usage context, and parameters adequately. Annotations provide safety guarantees. The description is complete for an agent to select and invoke correctly.

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?

Input schema has 100% description coverage with clear descriptions for each of the 4 parameters. The tool description does not add additional insight beyond the schema, so baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 that the tool returns the signature, body, attributes, and modifier of a named procedure. It distinguishes from the sibling tool bc_get_object by noting it is for a single procedure rather than the full object.

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 explicitly states it is 'useful when you only need a single procedure rather than the full object source,' providing clear usage context. It does not mention when not to use or list alternatives explicitly, but the sibling context implies alternatives.

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