create_table_record

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

No annotations provided, so description must fully disclose behavior. It only states 'Create a new record' implying mutation, but lacks details on permissions, side effects, validation, duplicate handling, or what the response contains. For a generic table creation tool, this is insufficient.

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?

Two sentences with no filler. The first sentence states the core action, and the second explains the key parameter. Information is front-loaded and every word earns its place.

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 tool's complexity (dynamic table and fields), no output schema, and multiple sibling tools, the description is incomplete. It lacks return value details, error handling, prerequisites, and guidance on when to use this vs specific create tools. More context is needed for an autonomous agent.

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?

With schema coverage at 0%, the description adds crucial meaning: it clarifies that 'table' takes the technical name and that 'fields' is a dict mapping field names to values. However, it does not specify expected value types or whether mandatory fields must be included, which would be beneficial.

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?

Clearly states the verb 'Create' and resource 'a new record in any ServiceNow table by technical name'. Distinguishes from sibling tools that target specific tables like incidents or requests, as this is the generic version. Also explains the 'fields' parameter as a dict of ServiceNow field name to value.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives. While siblings include specific create tools (create_incident, create_request, create_requested_item), the description does not advise using this generic tool for tables without a dedicated tool, nor caution against misusing it for those with dedicated tools.

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