generate_docs

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the burden. It mentions the output is Markdown text, but does not disclose whether instance access or authorization is needed, or if the tool is purely generative without side effects. Behavioral traits like read-only nature are implied but not explicit.

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 concise: one paragraph front-loaded with the main purpose, followed by a clear list of targets. Every sentence adds value 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?

Given the complexity (14 parameters, nested objects) and no output schema, the description explains the main function and doc_type options well, but does not map many parameters to their usage contexts (e.g., which params apply to which doc_type). Completeness is adequate but has 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?

The description adds meaning for the doc_type parameter by listing and explaining enum values. However, schema description coverage is low (21%), and the description does not explain other parameters like when, events, condition, or components. Thus, only partial compensation for schema gaps.

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 tool generates Markdown documentation for ServiceNow artifacts and lists specific doc targets with what each includes (e.g., script_include: 'Full API reference with method signatures'). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like generate_feature_doc or generate_migration_guide by focusing on artifact-specific documentation.

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 lists the supported doc targets, indicating when to use the tool. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or recommend alternatives. The context is clear but lacks exclusions.

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