generate_migration_guide

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

No annotations are provided, so description carries full burden. It states the tool does not touch ServiceNow via API and produces a human guide. It is transparent about non-destructive behavior, but could mention more details like output format or limitations. Adequate but not comprehensive.

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?

Three sentences, each earning its place: first states purpose, second clarifies non-API behavior, third details guide content. Front-loaded and no 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 complexity (nested objects, no output schema), description covers purpose, usage, and output. It could specify the guide's format or error handling, but is mostly complete for this tool's straightforward purpose.

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 100% with detailed parameter descriptions. The tool description adds context about flow_analysis coming from analysis tools, but does not significantly enhance schema meaning. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 generates a step-by-step guide for migrating Salesforce or Jira flows to ServiceNow Workflow Studio. It specifies the verb 'generates', the resource 'guide', and the context. It also distinguishes from siblings like analyze_flow by stating it should be called after analysis.

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?

Explicitly says 'Call this after analyze_flow or analyze_jira_automation', giving clear sequencing. Also clarifies it does not touch the API, implying it's for human guidance. Lacks explicit alternatives but provides enough context for appropriate use.

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