Delete ServiceNow attachment

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says 'Delete' and does not mention irreversibility, permissions, or the plan-mode preview behavior described in the apply parameter.

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 with no filler, front-loading the action and target. It is appropriately sized for the minimal information it conveys.

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 destructive mutation with no annotations and no output schema, the description is too sparse. It misses prerequisites, side effects, and execution-mode caveats; only the schema's apply and instance fields partially fill this gap.

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?

All three parameters have meaningful descriptions in the schema, so the baseline is 3. The description's 'by its sys_id' adds little beyond what the schema already states for attachment_sys_id.

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 exact operation (delete), the resource (attachment), and the selection method (by sys_id). This is clearly distinct from sibling tools like servicenow_delete_record and the other attachment-related operations.

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 gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention how to obtain the required sys_id. It relies on the schema for context but provides no exclusion or alternative references.

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