servicenow_delete_record

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the destructive verb 'Delete', but does not mention irreversibility, required permissions, soft vs hard delete, error behavior when the record is missing, or any side effects.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with zero filler. It immediately states the action, scope, and identifier without redundant phrasing.

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 a destructive mutation with no annotations, no output schema, and 0% parameter description coverage. The one-sentence description does not provide enough context about usage, safety, or parameter formats for an agent to invoke it confidently.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It conceptually maps the two parameters by saying 'any ServiceNow table' (table) and 'by sys_id' (sysId), but adds no format details such as valid table names or sys_id syntax.

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?

States a specific verb ('Delete'), resource ('one record'), scope ('from any ServiceNow table'), and identifier ('by sys_id'). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling read, create, update, and flow-deletion tools without needing the schema.

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?

Provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like update_record or delete_flow, and no prerequisites such as required permissions or confirmation. The implied usage is deletion, but nothing is stated about context or exclusions.

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