fetch_servicenow_doc

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

Annotations provide readOnlyHint and openWorldHint. The description adds that only ServiceNow docs are reachable, that the ref is fastest/exact, and that it fetches 'full readable text'. This goes beyond the annotations but does not cover behavior like rate limits or error handling.

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 four short sentences, each earning its place. It is front-loaded with the main purpose, then provides input guidance, usage context, and scope constraint. No fluff.

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?

The description covers what, how, when, and constraints. Since there is no output schema, it does not explicitly state the return format beyond 'full readable text', and it doesn't mention maxChars behavior (though that is in the schema). Still, it is largely complete for a simple read-only tool.

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%, so the schema already explains all three parameters. The description reiterates the ref/URL distinction and adds 'fastest, exact' as extra context, but that is marginal beyond the schema descriptions.

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 opens with 'Fetch the full readable text of a specific ServiceNow documentation page' – a specific verb+resource+scope. It clearly distinguishes itself from the sibling search_servicenow_docs by positioning itself as the follow-up action to read a result in full.

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?

It explicitly says 'Use after search_servicenow_docs to read a result in full', naming the alternative and the proper sequence. It also gives guidance on which parameter to use (ref preferred, URL fallback) and restricts the scope: 'only ServiceNow docs are reachable'.

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