Get All Comments of the Given Issue

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions retrieving comments but introduces an incorrect 'comment_url' parameter and does not disclose potential pagination, ordering, or output format. This could mislead the agent about how the tool operates.

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 sentence but is grammatically awkward ('Retrieves the all comments') and unnecessarily verbose ('which is given in the parameter of the function'). It is not well-structured or front-loaded.

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 tool has no output schema and a minimal description that does not explain return values or behavior beyond fetching comments. The erroneous reference to 'comment_url' makes the description incomplete and potentially misleading, especially given the lack of sibling differentiation.

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 clear descriptions for all three required parameters (repoName, repoOwner, issue_number) with 100% coverage. The description adds little value and even confuses by referencing a non-existent 'comment_url' parameter, but the schema is sufficient to understand the parameters.

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 states the tool retrieves all comments for a given issue, which is the core purpose. However, the phrase 'based on its comment_url datafield which is given in the parameter' is confusing and references a field (comment_url) that is not among the actual parameters, detracting from clarity.

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 like fetch_all_issues or fetch_merged_prs. The description simply states what it does without any context for tool selection or exclusions.

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