append_comments

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral disclosure burden. It mentions deduping exact text by default, but that same detail is already in the schema. It does not disclose permissions required, whether it modifies the database persistently, how it interacts with existing comments, or whether a save is needed afterward.

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?

The description is a single, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It is appropriately sized for a concise tool summary.

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 mutation tool with no annotations, no output schema, and a required routing parameter, the description is too sparse. It omits when to use the tool, the necessity of providing `instance_id` or calling `instance_list`, and any post-append persistence implications.

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 50%. The description maps loosely to `addr`, `comment`, and `dedupe` via 'at addresses,' 'comments,' and 'deduping,' but adds little beyond the nested schema descriptions. The required `instance_id` routing parameter is not mentioned in the description, leaving a gap the schema partially fills.

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: 'Append comments at addresses.' It also notes deduping behavior. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from the sibling tool `set_comments`, which would help an agent choose correctly.

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 tool versus alternatives like `set_comments`, nor are prerequisites (e.g., required `instance_id`, calling `instance_list` first) mentioned in the description. Usage is only implied by the verb 'append.'

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