create_change_request

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It states this is a creation operation but provides no information about permissions required, whether this triggers workflows or notifications, what happens on success/failure, or any side effects. The description doesn't compensate for the lack of 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 extremely concise at just 7 words, front-loading the essential action and resource. There's no wasted language or unnecessary elaboration, making it efficient for an agent to parse.

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 creation tool with 10 parameters, 0% schema description coverage, no annotations, and no output schema, this description is severely inadequate. It doesn't explain what constitutes a valid change request, what happens after creation, or provide any context about the ServiceNow change management process.

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 schema description coverage is 0%, meaning none of the 10 parameters have descriptions in the schema. The tool description provides absolutely no information about parameters, not even mentioning the required 'short_description' and 'type' fields or explaining what a change request consists of.

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 verb ('Create') and resource ('a new change request in ServiceNow'), making the purpose immediately understandable. However, it doesn't differentiate this tool from its sibling 'update_change_request' or explain what distinguishes creating from updating a change request.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'update_change_request' or 'list_change_requests'. There's no mention of prerequisites, appropriate contexts, or when this tool should be avoided in favor of other options.

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