Describe ServiceNow table

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the read-only nature is covered. The description adds useful behavioral context by naming the exact source table and the fields returned, but it does not describe error behavior, instance resolution, or any external network implications despite openWorldHint=true.

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?

A single sentence that front-loads the action and resource, then compacts the output fields into a parenthetical list. There is no filler or redundant phrasing.

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 read-only describe operation with one required parameter, the description provides sufficient context: what it lists, where it reads from, and which columns are returned. The absence of an output schema is mitigated by the explicit field list in the description.

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 description coverage is 100%, with both 'table' and 'instance' clearly described. The description adds mild context by clarifying that the output comes from sys_dictionary, but the parameters themselves are already well documented in the schema, so the baseline of 3 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 uses a specific verb ('List') and resource ('a table's columns') and identifies the data source ('from sys_dictionary'). It clearly distinguishes this tool from siblings like servicenow_list_instances or servicenow_get_status, which serve different purposes.

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 implies when to use the tool: when you need table column metadata from sys_dictionary. It does not explicitly state when-not-to-use or name alternative tools for related tasks, but the sibling context makes the intended use reasonably clear.

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