List Knowledge Bases

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint, so the read-only nature is given. The description adds useful behavioral context by specifying the source table and the optional filtering by active status and encoded query, going beyond what annotations provide without contradicting them.

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 only two sentences: the first states the core functionality and source, the second provides a clear usage context. Every word is purposeful, 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?

Despite lacking an output schema, the description, combined with rich parameter schemas and annotations, fully covers the essential context for a read-only list operation. It explains the data source, optional filters, and a typical use case, making it complete for an agent to select and use 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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, with each parameter thoroughly described. The description adds minimal value beyond the schema, merely summarizing that filtering by active and query is possible. This aligns with the baseline of 3 for a schema-rich tool.

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 lists knowledge bases on a ServiceNow instance, with a specific resource (kb_knowledge_base table) and distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_kb_articles and get_knowledge_base by focusing on the discovery of KBs rather than their contents or individual retrieval.

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 a concrete use case ('Use this to discover available KBs before browsing articles or categories'), implying when it should be used relative to other tools. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use this tool, so it falls short of a 5.

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