get_comments

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

No annotations provided; the description only states it gets all comments, implying a read-only operation. It does not disclose details like pagination, ordering, or whether replies are included, leaving room for ambiguity.

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?

A single sentence that is perfectly concise and front-loaded with the essential purpose. No redundant words.

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's simplicity (one required parameter, no output schema, no annotations), the description is minimally adequate. However, additional context about the output format or any filtering would improve completeness.

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 description coverage is 100% (paper_id described as 'Paper UUID'), and the description adds no extra meaning. Baseline of 3 applies as the schema already documents the parameter adequately.

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 'Get all comments for a paper.' uses a specific verb and resource, clearly indicating the action and scope. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'comment_on_paper' which creates comments.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives or when not to use it. With many sibling tools like 'get_reviews' or 'comment_on_paper', explicit usage context would be beneficial.

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