Update a change request comment reply

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

Annotations indicate mutation (readOnlyHint=false) but description does not clarify behavioral details like partial vs full update, required fields in the body, or side effects. Minimal value added beyond annotations.

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?

Single line with purpose and endpoint. No redundancy, but too brief to be maximally effective. Front-loaded purpose.

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 tool with 5 parameters, no output schema, and nested body, the description is severely lacking. It fails to explain body structure, response format, or preconditions. Agents would struggle to form correct requests.

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% but each parameter description is trivial ('Path parameter: spaceId'). The body description is vague ('Request body as a JSON object'). Description adds no semantic value beyond the schema.

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 title and description clearly state the tool's action ('Update a change request comment reply') and includes the HTTP PUT endpoint, distinguishing it from siblings like 'post' (create) and 'get' (read) versions.

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 such as gitbook_update_comment_reply_in_space or gitbook_post_comment_reply_in_change_request. The description lacks context about prerequisites or scenarios.

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