SAPSearch

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the delegation behavior and the need to pass appropriate args, but does not specify whether the tool is read-only, what happens on invalid operation, or any side effects. The disclosure is accurate but 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 extremely concise: two sentences with no extraneous information. It front-loads the tool's purpose and then gives the key delegation pattern.

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 complexity of a consolidated tool with nested args and no output schema or annotations, the description is incomplete. It does not specify what args each operation expects or provide examples, leaving the agent to infer or rely on external knowledge, which risks incorrect invocation.

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% with descriptions for both parameters. The description adds the list of accepted operations and clarifies that args are passed through to the underlying tool, which adds some context beyond the schema. However, it does not elaborate on the structure of args for each operation, so value added is moderate.

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 it is a consolidated search verb that delegates by operation (objects, source, call_graph, dead_code). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like search_abap_syntax and search_sap_web by being a meta-tool covering multiple ABAP search domains, but does not explicitly contrast them.

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 provided on when to use this consolidated tool versus the individual search tools (e.g., search_abap_syntax, search_sap_web) or other siblings. The description lacks any 'when to use' or 'alternative' hints.

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