List service offerings from ServiceNow, optionally filtered by parent business service, to locate specific offerings by name.
List service offerings (service_offering), optionally by parent business service
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | No | Max records (default 50) | |
| query | No | Search offerings by name | |
| parent | No | Parent business service sys_id |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v4.15.1Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true. The description adds no behavioral context beyond what annotations provide, such as pagination behavior, response format, or any constraints. It only restates the filter option already present in the schema.
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 with no wasted words. It states the core action and the optional filter efficiently.
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 list operation with optional filters and no output schema, the description is adequate but lacks usage guidance and behavioral details. It is not as complete as it could be, but covers the essential purpose.
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?
The schema already covers all parameters with descriptions (limit, query, parent) at 100% coverage. The description adds minimal value by mentioning the parent filter, which is redundant with the schema. 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 clearly states a specific verb and resource ('List service offerings') and mentions the optional filter by parent business service. It distinguishes the resource from other list tools, though it does not explicitly differentiate from siblings like list_catalog_items.
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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It merely states the optional parent filter, but does not explain when this tool is preferred over other list tools or any exclusions.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.