Describe a table's columns

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false. The description adds valuable behavioral context: it highlights that inherited columns are included and explains the importance of using the system name (not UI label) for the table parameter. No contradiction with 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?

The description is two sentences, front-loaded with the tool's purpose, then provides usage guidance. Every sentence is essential, with no redundancy or waste.

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?

Given the single parameter, rich annotations, and lack of output schema, the description fully covers purpose, usage guidance, parameter semantics, and key behavioral traits (inherited columns). It is complete for a schema exploration 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 coverage is 100% with one described parameter. The description adds significant meaning by specifying that the table parameter should be the system name rather than the UI label and references servicenow_list_tables to find it, going beyond the schema's basic description.

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 it lists a table's columns with types, labels, and reference targets, including inherited columns. It distinguishes effectively from sibling tools like servicenow_list_tables (which lists tables, not columns) and servicenow_query_table (which queries data).

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 explicitly advises: 'Call this before writing a query against an unfamiliar table, or when a query returns unexpectedly little.' This provides clear context for when to use the tool, though it does not explicitly exclude scenarios where it is unnecessary.

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