add_comment

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the action without detailing side effects, error conditions, or whether comments are threaded. The agent cannot assess if this operation is safe or what happens on duplicate or invalid para_id.

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 (9 words) but lacks structure. It does not separate purpose from usage details. While it is front-loaded, it omits essential information that could be added without sacrificing conciseness.

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 the tool has 4 parameters, no parameter descriptions, no annotations, and no output schema details in the description, the description is severely incomplete. It fails to provide enough context for correct invocation, especially regarding which parameters are required and how to specify the paragraph anchoring.

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 has 4 parameters (text, author, para_id, document_handle) with 0% description coverage. The description does not mention any parameters or their meanings, adding no value beyond the raw schema. The agent has no semantic information about required vs optional fields or constraints.

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 'Add a comment anchored to a paragraph' clearly states the action (add a comment) and the resource (a paragraph). It distinguishes from sibling tools like reply_to_comment, update_comment, or add_bookmark by specifying the anchoring to a paragraph.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like reply_to_comment or add_inline_comment. There is no mention of prerequisites (e.g., document must be open, para_id must exist) or when not to use it.

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