Api comments object retrieve

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds nothing of its own — no note about what the comment object contains, permission scoping, or what happens on a missing/invalid id.

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?

It is a single identifier string with zero waste, but this is under-specification rather than conciseness — there is no sentence to be front-loaded because no explanatory content exists.

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 read-only retrieval with no output schema, the description should at least say what is returned and how id is formatted. Neither is present, leaving the agent dependent entirely on the tool name and annotations.

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 0% and the single 'id' parameter is completely undocumented in both schema and description. The description does not clarify whether id is a numeric PK, UUID, or slug, which is the main ambiguity for a retrieve-by-identifier 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 is literally the tool identifier restated ('api_comments_object_retrieve'), adding no verb or object explanation beyond the name. An agent can infer it retrieves a comment object, but nothing distinguishes it from the many sibling '*_object_retrieve' and '*_retrieve' tools in this API.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this versus ciso_assistant_api_comments_retrieve, ciso_assistant_api_comments_list, or the cascade_info variants. The agent must guess from naming conventions alone.

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