weeek_add_comment

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the full burden. It usefully discloses that the comment is authored as the token's owner (no impersonation) and that content is markdown. It omits permission requirements, error behavior, and whether the resulting comment can be edited, which matters for a mutation tool with zero annotation coverage.

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?

Two sentences, both front-loaded with the essential action first and the threading caveat second. Nothing is redundant or padded.

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?

No output schema and no annotations exist, so the description has to do more work than it does. It covers purpose, threading, and identity but never states whether the new comment id is returned, what auth scope is needed, or what failure modes look like.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It fully documents `reply_to` (comment id from weeek_list_comments) and clarifyes `markdown` as the body format, but `id` is only inferable from the phrase 'to a WEEEK task' and the minLength=1 constraint is never surfaced.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Add a markdown comment to a WEEEK task') and immediately scopes it with the identity constraint ('as the token's owner'). Clearly distinguishable from the comment siblings weeek_list_comments and weeek_delete_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?

Gives an explicit conditional for the reply flow: pass `reply_to` to answer in a thread, and it names weeek_list_comments as the source of valid ids. It doesn't cover when not to use it (e.g., editing an existing comment) or any permissions prerequisites, so it stops short of the 5 level.

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