sap_get_screen_info

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

The description reveals that the tool reads from `session.ActiveWindow` so the response always reflects what the user sees, and explains the `active_window` field and title. This adds valuable behavioral context beyond the annotations (readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false). No contradictions.

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 bit lengthy but well-structured with a clear main sentence followed by additional context. Every sentence adds value, covering the source of data, what fields are returned, and how it relates to other tools. Slightly verbose but still concise for the information provided.

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 zero parameters and the presence of an output schema, the description provides complete context: it lists the returned fields, explains the data source, and mentions the relation to action tools. The agent has all necessary information to understand and use the tool 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?

The tool has zero parameters, and the schema coverage is 100%. The description does not need to add parameter semantics, but it effectively explains what the tool returns. Baseline of 4 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 it retrieves current SAP screen info including transaction, program, screen number, window title, and status bar message. It also distinguishes itself from the sibling tool sap_get_popup_window by noting that the latter is for full popup content.

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 explains that every action tool returns this same screen info, so the agent knows when a popup appears. It also suggests using sap_get_popup_window for full popup content, providing clear guidance on when to use this tool vs. alternatives. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it.

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