Install Store Application

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

While annotations already indicate destructiveHint and readOnlyHint false, the description significantly expands on the behavioral profile: it explicitly labels the operation as 'MUTATIVE, LONG-RUNNING' and notes it 'blocks until installation completes or times out (default: 30 minutes).' It also discloses that installation adds tables, scripts, and configuration, and warns about capacity/entitlements—all beyond the annotation hints.

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 well-structured with a clear opening sentence, an 'IMPORTANT' section, and a closing guidance line. It is somewhat longer than strictly necessary, but every sentence adds value—covering mutability, timeout, prerequisites, and discovery. The front-loading of key traits (mutative, long-running) is effective.

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 (mutative, long-running install operation) and absence of an output schema, the description is thorough. It explains what happens, how long it blocks, prerequisites (capacity, entitlements), and how to find installable apps. It does not explicitly describe the return value, but for a blocking operation with no output schema, the behavioral disclosure is sufficient.

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 coverage is 100% with detailed descriptions for all five parameters, so the baseline is 3. The description adds high-level context (e.g., 'Use get_app_details to see available versions') but does not materially increase per-parameter meaning beyond what the schema already provides. It does reinforce connection to discovery tools, but that is more usage guidance than parameter semantics.

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 action: 'Install a ServiceNow store application on the target instance.' It specifies the resource (store application) and target (instance), and distinguishes from siblings like install_from_app_repo (different source) and update_store_app (update vs install).

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 gives explicit when-to-use guidance: 'Use search_store_apps with tab_context 'available_for_you' to find apps available for installation.' It also recommends reviewing app details with get_app_details and testing on sub-production, effectively guiding the agent through prerequisites and alternatives.

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