get_script_include

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It states 'Get' which implies a read operation, but doesn't disclose behavioral traits like authentication needs, rate limits, error handling, or what happens if the script include doesn't exist. For a tool with zero annotation coverage, this is a significant gap.

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 a single, efficient sentence with zero waste, front-loading the core purpose. It's appropriately sized for a simple retrieval tool.

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 no annotations, no output schema, and low schema description coverage (0%), the description is incomplete. It lacks details on behavior, parameters, return values, and usage context, making it inadequate for a tool that retrieves data from a complex system like ServiceNow.

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%, with one parameter ('script_include_id') documented only as 'Script include ID or name' in the schema. The description adds no information about parameter semantics, format, examples, or constraints, failing to compensate for the low coverage.

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 ('Get') and resource ('a specific script include from ServiceNow'), making the purpose understandable. It distinguishes from sibling 'list_script_includes' by specifying 'specific' rather than listing, though it doesn't explicitly name the sibling alternative.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'list_script_includes' or 'create_script_include'. The description implies usage for retrieving a single script include but offers no context about prerequisites, error conditions, or comparisons to other tools.

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