validateNewObject

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

The description implies a read-only validation action but does not explicitly state whether it has side effects, is safe to call multiple times, or what happens on validation failure. With no annotations, the description should compensate but fails to disclose behavioral traits.

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 single sentence, making it concise. However, it is too brief to be informative; it could include more detail without becoming verbose. It earns its place minimally.

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 no annotations, no output schema, and a partially documented parameter set, the description is incomplete. It does not explain validation outcomes, error handling, or how the tool fits into an ABAP object creation workflow.

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 two parameters with 50% description coverage (only 'connection' is described). The description adds no parameter-level information, leaving 'options' entirely unexplained. It does not compensate for the schema's gaps.

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 'Validate parameters for a new ABAP object' clearly states a specific verb (validate) and resource (parameters for a new ABAP object). The purpose is distinguishable from sibling tools like 'createObject' and 'editObjectSource', though the description alone does not explicitly differentiate.

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 guidelines are provided about when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as before creating an object or for checking input validity. There is no mention of prerequisites, contexts, or tool selection advice.

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