fluent_init

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

The description contradicts the annotations: annotations declare readOnlyHint=true (read-only), but the description says it runs 'npx @servicenow/sdk init', which creates files and is a write operation. Furthermore, the description does not disclose side effects, such as project scaffolding or modification of the filesystem.

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 short (two sentences) and front-loaded: first sentence states purpose, second states prerequisites. No unnecessary information.

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 the conflicting annotations and lack of output schema, the description should explain what the init command does in more detail (e.g., creates a project directory, package.json, etc.). It is incomplete for a tool that has behavioral contradictions and no return value documentation.

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 describes all three parameters (name, template, directory) with 100% coverage. The description does not add additional meaning beyond what the schema provides, so a baseline score 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 clearly states the tool initializes a new ServiceNow fluent/now-sdk project and specifies the command it runs. This is distinct from sibling tools like fluent_build or fluent_explain, which have 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 mentions required environment variables (FLUENT_ENABLED=true, WRITE_ENABLED=true), which provides usage constraints. However, it does not specify when not to use this tool or suggest alternative tools, leaving guidance minimal.

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