add_case_comment

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says 'mutation' and shows the expected input, with no mention of write side effects, required permissions, error behavior, or return value. This is insufficient for a mutation tool.

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 very brief and front-loaded, containing a label and an example. It avoids unnecessary detail. However, the cryptic 'Cases · mutation addCaseComment' phrase could be more readable, and the example is essential to understanding the usage.

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 simple mutation, the example provides enough to construct a basic call, but the description lacks usage guidelines, behavioral context, and return value information. With no output schema, the description should at least mention what the mutation accomplishes or returns. It is adequate but has clear gaps.

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?

The schema's description of the required 'input' parameter is merely 'GraphQL: CaseCommentInput!', which is opaque. The tool description compensates by providing an example structure with 'caseId' and 'comment', adding meaningful semantics beyond the schema. The optional 'customer_slug' is already described in the schema.

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 clearly indicates this is a GraphQL mutation to add a case comment, with example variables showing 'caseId' and 'comment'. The 'Cases ·' prefix helps distinguish it from sibling comment tools like add_incident_comment and add_task_comment, though it lacks a plain-language verb phrase.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. Multiple sibling tools exist for adding comments to different entities, but the description does not mention them or any selection criteria, leaving the agent without explicit usage direction.

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