get_system_property

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, covering safety and openness. However, the description adds no behavioral context beyond that, such as how missing properties are handled, permissions required, or the exact nature of the 'metadata' returned. Given the annotations, the lack of additional behavioral disclosure leaves a gap.

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 immediately states the action and resource. No wasted words, and it is easily parsed by an agent.

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?

This is a simple one-parameter getter with clear annotations. The description covers the essential purpose and parameter. The only missing piece is the exact return format or error behavior, but given the simplicity and the presence of annotations, the description is nearly complete.

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% for the single 'name' parameter, with an example (glide.smtp.host). The tool description adds nothing beyond the schema, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate because the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 'Get' and identifies the resource as 'ServiceNow system property' with scope 'by name', clearly distinguishing it from siblings like list_system_properties or search_system_properties. It is unambiguous and tells the agent exactly what the tool does.

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 usage when a specific property name is known, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool vs alternatives like search_system_properties or list_system_properties. There is no direct guidance on exclusions or context, making it adequate but minimally directive.

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