Delete comment

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

The description goes well beyond the annotations by explaining that deletion is not recorded in the changelog, that it is irreversible and unrecoverable, and that the plan mode reveals which comment would be destroyed. This adds meaningful behavioral context beyond the destructiveHint=true annotation and does not contradict any annotation.

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?

Three sentences, with the core operation and irreversible warning front-loaded, followed by the configuration requirement and the sibling guidance. Every sentence earns its place and there is no filler.

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?

Despite the absence of an output schema, the description covers the critical operational facts: destructive behavior, changelog omission, the required configuration flag, the plan-before-apply mechanics, and the safer alternative. The input schema fully covers parameter details, so nothing needed for correct selection and invocation is missing.

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 100% and each parameter already has a meaningful schema description, including how commentId is reported by jira_get_comments. The tool description itself adds no parameter-level detail, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 a specific verb and resource: 'Permanently delete one comment from an issue.' It clearly distinguishes this from the sibling jira_update_comment by noting that the update tool edits instead, so an agent can immediately tell the tools apart.

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 gives explicit usage context: the caller needs JIRA_ALLOW_IRREVERSIBLE=true in addition to the normal plan-apply flow, and the plan works without the flag. It also names the alternative tool for the common 'correct a comment' use case, explicitly saying jira_update_comment edits in place instead.

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