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

Adds useful context beyond annotations: soft delete (recoverable) and an authorization rule (author or workspace owner). Annotations already cover destructive/idempotent hints, so this is additive but limited—no detail on side effects or what a soft-deleted comment looks like.

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 tight sentences, front-loaded with the action and its mutation trait, then the permission constraint. No waste.

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?

For a destructive, multi-parameter mutation with sparse schema documentation and no output schema, the description leaves required parameters, idempotency behavior, and the scope of 'soft delete' unexplained.

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 33%; the description never explains required id, commentId, or idempotency_key, nor the optional brand_id/workspace_id/query overrides. With low coverage, the description should compensate but does not.

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?

States a specific verb (soft delete) and resource (a comment), and clarifies the soft-delete nature. Distinguishable from siblings like delete_task or update_post_comment, though it doesn't explicitly name them.

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?

Implies deletion of a comment but gives no explicit when-to-use vs when-not, no mention of alternatives like update_post_comment (for editing instead), and no prerequisites beyond the permission sentence.

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