notion_update_comment

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

No annotations provided. The description mentions routing through /api/tools/invoke with JWT scope, but fails to disclose behavioral details such as whether it mutates data, what happens if the comment doesn't exist, or what parameters are required. The description does not compensate for missing 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?

The description is short, but it is not effectively concise because it lacks substance. The routing information is niche and may not help the agent. Every sentence is present but does not earn its place by providing actionable guidance.

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?

Given the existence of an output schema, return values may be covered, but the description fails to outline the required structure of the arguments parameter. For a mutation tool like update_comment, knowing expected fields is critical. The description leaves the agent without enough context to invoke the tool correctly.

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%. The description says arguments is a JSON string for the connector operation, but does not specify expected keys (e.g., comment_id, content). This adds minimal value beyond the schema field name.

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 it's for updating a comment in Notion, but it's generic and doesn't explain what updating entails. It could apply to any Notion connector operation. The name alone provides basic purpose, but the description adds no specific detail about what 'update_comment' does (e.g., edit content, change parent).

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 vs. alternatives like notion_create_comment, notion_delete_comment, or notion_get_comment. There's no context about prerequisites, typical use cases, or scenarios where this tool is preferred.

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