Switch the active ServiceNow instance for this session to target specific environments like prod, dev, or customer_a, enabling operations on the desired instance.
Switch the active ServiceNow instance for this session
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| name | Yes | Instance name as configured (e.g. "prod", "dev", "customer_a") |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.2Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already provide idempotentHint=true and destructiveHint=false, and the description adds the session-scoped nature of the switch. However, it does not elaborate on side effects or prerequisites, so it only partially adds behavioral context beyond the annotations.
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?
One sentence, no filler. Every word contributes to the meaning and the description is appropriately sized for the tool's simplicity.
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 tool is simple with one fully documented parameter and no output schema. The description is sufficient for an agent to understand the operation's purpose and scope, though it does not reference how to list available instances.
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 fully documents the single 'name' parameter with a clear description and example values. The tool description adds no additional parameter information, so it meets the baseline for high schema coverage.
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 (switch), the target (active ServiceNow instance), and the scope (for this session). It distinguishes from sibling tools like get_current_instance or list_instances by focusing on changing the active instance.
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 by stating the action, but does not explicitly explain when to choose it over alternatives or mention any exclusions. Since the context is clear and the operation is distinct from related tools, this is a 4.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.