get_comment

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, covering the basic safety profile. The description adds no additional behavioral context such as error handling, return format, or requirements like the comment existing before retrieval.

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 a single short sentence, which is concise and front-loaded, but it is so sparse that it carries minimal information. It does not expand on the tool's scope or parameters, making it under-specified for the tool's complexity.

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?

With no output schema, the description should at least hint at the return value or clarify the document–comment relationship. It provides neither, relying entirely on the schema and annotations. The tool is not complex, but the description adds no contextual value beyond the name.

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 input schema provides full descriptions for all three parameters (100% coverage), so the description does not need to add much. The description 'Fetch a comment' adds no extra meaning beyond the schema's parameter descriptions, meeting the baseline for high schema coverage.

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 'Fetch a comment' uses a specific verb and resource, making the core action clear. However, it does not differentiate this tool from other get_* sibling tools (e.g., get_note, get_task), or mention that comments are tied to documents.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as list_comments or create_comment. There are no context cues, prerequisites, or exclusions beyond what is implicitly understood from the name.

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