sap_select_tab

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

The description adds behavioral context beyond annotations by explaining that after selection, screen info is returned and tab content changes. This is valuable since annotations only indicate non-readonly and non-destructive behavior. However, it does not mention error cases (e.g., invalid tab_id).

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 the first clearly stating the purpose and the second adding a behavioral note and example. Every word earns its place with no redundancy or superfluous text.

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?

For a simple selection tool with one parameter and an output schema (mentioned), the description is fairly complete: it explains the action, the return value, and gives a parameter example. It could mention prerequisites like an active session, but that is implicit given the sibling context.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description compensates by providing a concrete example of a tab ID format ('wnd[0]/usr/tabsTABSTRIP/tabpTAB01'), adding meaning to the otherwise bare string parameter. This significantly aids the agent in understanding the expected input.

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 states the specific action 'Select a tab in a tab strip control' and distinguishes this tool from sibling selection tools by naming the resource type ('tab') and providing an example of typical tab IDs. This is a specific verb and resource with clear differentiation.

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?

While the description implies the tool should be used when a tab selection is needed, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or compare with alternatives like sap_select_checkbox or sap_select_tree_node. The guidance is implied but lacks explicit exclusion criteria.

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