get_script_include

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

The description adds the critical behavioral constraint that SCRIPTING_ENABLED must be true, which is not captured by the annotations. Annotations already indicate readOnly, idempotent, and open world hints. The description does not contradict annotations.

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 extremely concise, consisting of a single sentence that front-loads the action and includes an essential condition. Every word adds value; there is no redundancy.

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 one parameter and no output schema, the description sufficiently indicates what the tool does and its prerequisite. It does not describe the return format, but 'full script body' implies the response contains the script source. For a simple retrieval tool, this is adequate.

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 sole parameter 'sys_id_or_name' is described in the schema with 'Script include sys_id or api_name'. Schema description coverage is 100%. The tool description reaffirms the parameter's purpose by stating it identifies which script include to fetch. No additional semantic details are needed beyond what the schema provides.

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 the resource 'full script body of a script include'. It distinguishes the tool from siblings like 'list_script_includes' which lists script includes, and 'update_script_include' which modifies them, by focusing on retrieving the script body.

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 mentions a prerequisite (SCRIPTING_ENABLED=true), providing clear context for when the tool can be used. It does not explicitly state when not to use it or name alternatives, but the requirement serves as a useful guideline.

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