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

Beyond the destructiveHint annotation, the description discloses that the old text is not kept and the comment is marked edited. It also notes the ownership constraint ('connected user wrote'), adding behavioral context.

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 compact sentences with the main verb and object first, followed by relevant constraints and effects. No filler or 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?

The description covers the action, ownership constraint, and outcome. With an output schema present and no nested objects, it is sufficiently complete, though it could mention failure cases if the comment isn't owned.

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% and each parameter has a clear description, including how to obtain IDs. The description adds no further parameter-specific meaning, so baseline 3 applies.

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 specifies the action ('Replace the text of a comment'), the resource ('a comment the connected user wrote'), and the effect ('Marks it as edited; the old text is not kept'), which distinguishes it from add/delete comment siblings.

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 usage is implied by 'the connected user wrote' and 'Replace', but it does not explicitly state when to use this over add_verification_comment or delete_verification_comment, nor does it mention exclusions.

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