get_comment_details

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry full behavioral disclosure. It does state the download behavior and that it returns size/sha256 stats, but it is ambiguous about what happens when saveDir is omitted and whether this writes to disk or is a read-only operation from the agent's perspective.

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?

Two sentences, every clause earns its place. The first sentence front-loads the core purpose, and the second succinctly describes return value. No filler or redundancy.

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?

The description explains the scope of attachments and return stats, but lacks clarity on side effects, error behavior, and the role of the optional saveDir in the overall flow. Without an output schema, a bit more detail would be needed for full agent certainty.

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%, so the baseline applies. The description adds context about attachment sources (AttachedFile relations + comment body references) but does not clarify parameter semantics beyond what the schema already provides (e.g., the effect of omitting saveDir).

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?

Description uses a specific compound verb ('Resolve...AND download') identifying both the resource (work item/comment) and the action (download attachments). It distinguishes itself from siblings like get_work_item and get_work_item_comments by explicitly including attachment download and content stats.

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 intended use is implied ('if you need work item details plus attachments'), but no explicit alternatives or exclusions are stated. Sibling tools are not referenced, so the agent must infer when to choose this over get_work_item or download_artifact.

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