Resolve Comment

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

Annotations already declare this as non-destructive, idempotent, and non-read-only. The description adds the return structure (id and resolved: true), which is useful. However, it does not disclose edge cases like what happens if the comment is already resolved or the document is inaccessible.

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 concise and front-loaded with the purpose. The args/returns structure is clear. It wastes no words, though it could be more structured for readability (e.g., bullet points).

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 simple tool with 2 parameters and no output schema, the description is sufficient. It explains the core function and return format. With openWorldHint true, the AI can assume additional behavior, but the description covers the immediate use case.

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 100% description coverage, so the schema already explains the parameters. The description's parameter list adds no new meaning beyond the schema, hitting the baseline for a high-coverage tool.

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 clearly states the action ('Mark a comment as resolved') and the resource ('Google Doc'). However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like 'drive_reply_to_comment' or 'drive_delete_comment', which could cause confusion for the AI.

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, nor does it mention prerequisites (e.g., that the comment must exist and be unresolved). The AI agent is left to infer usage context.

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