Import Records from XML

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

Annotations already declare the tool as mutative (readOnlyHint false) and destructive (destructiveHint true). The description reinforces this with 'mutative operation that creates or updates records' and adds a caution to verify content. It does not contradict annotations, but adds limited new behavioral context beyond what annotations provide.

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 and front-loaded, with the first sentence immediately stating the action and mechanism. The second sentence adds a clear warning and use cases. Every sentence earns its place with no redundancy or fluff.

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 moderate complexity (3 parameters, no output schema) and the presence of annotations, the description is largely complete. It covers purpose, usage, and safety, but could potentially mention error handling or what the response looks like. Overall, it is sufficient for an agent to select and invoke it correctly.

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 input schema has 100% coverage, so the schema already fully describes each parameter. The description adds minimal new information about parameters, only referencing the XML format which is also mentioned in the schema. Baseline 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 the tool imports XML records into a ServiceNow instance via the sys_upload.do processor, and specifies the format as ServiceNow unload XML. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like export_record_xml by being the import counterpart, and from other creation tools by focusing on XML content.

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 explicitly states when to use this tool: 'for restoring configurations, migrating records between instances, or applying exported record definitions.' It also provides a clear caution about verifying XML content and target table. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it, which is a minor gap.

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