List Service Catalog Requests

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and non-destructive behavior, so the safety profile is known. The description adds valuable context by explaining request states, default query behavior, and return fields, going beyond the structured 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 well-organized with a clear purpose statement, parameter breakdown, state reference, and return specification. Every sentence conveys useful information without redundancy.

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 read-only list tool with strong annotations and simple parameters, the description is complete. It states what records are returned and the meaning of state values, leaving no significant gaps.

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%, but the description enriches parameters by providing a concrete query example ('opened_by=javascript:gs.getUserID()') and mapping state numbers to meanings, which is not present in the schema.

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 service catalog requests (REQ records) with filters, using a specific verb and resource. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_incidents or list_changes.

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 explains the default behavior (open requests) and provides example query syntax, giving clear context for use. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the tool's scope is self-evident from its name and description.

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