list_applicant_comments

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

The description discloses pagination limits and default filtering, which are key behaviors. However, it omits details like sorting order, error handling, or whether the function is read-only (no annotations provided).

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?

Extremely concise at two sentences, with no redundant information. The first sentence covers purpose and default behavior; the second covers pagination. Efficient but could be more structured.

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 no output schema, the description does not explain the return format or field contents. It provides enough for basic use but lacks details on response structure or data meaning.

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 coverage is 100% with descriptions; the description adds little beyond what the schema already provides (e.g., default filter and pagination limits are stated in schema properties).

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 what the tool does: listing comments about an applicant. It specifies the default filter (type=COMMENT) and pagination, making it distinct from sibling tools like add_applicant_comment.

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 (e.g., when to use all_types). No mention of prerequisites or context for choosing this over sibling tools.

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