publish_changeset

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

Annotations indicate no readOnly, no idempotency, no destructiveness. The description adds behavioral context: the tool exports to XML and requires a configuration flag, which is valuable beyond the annotations. No contradictions.

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, front-loaded sentence that conveys purpose and prerequisite without extraneous words. Every part earns its place.

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, single-parameter tool with clear purpose and prerequisites, the description is mostly complete. It could mention what happens with the XML output (e.g., returned or saved), but the current info suffices for agent understanding.

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 coverage is 100%, and the description does not add meaning beyond the schema for the single parameter 'sys_id'. Baseline score applies as description adds no parameter-specific insights.

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 action 'Publish/export', the resource 'update set', the output format 'XML', and a prerequisite condition. It distinguishes from siblings like commit_changeset and export_update_set by specifying 'for deployment'.

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 a prerequisite (SCRIPTING_ENABLED=true) but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like commit_changeset or preview_update_set. The purpose for deployment provides context, but exclusions are absent.

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