gorelo_get_ticket_comment

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so safety is covered. The description adds genuine value beyond that: it discloses the return shape (same as a list item) and the key behavioral difference that full BodyHtml is always present and BodyTruncated is omitted, which is exactly the context needed with no output schema present.

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 tight sentences that front-load the operation and then explain the one meaningful difference from a list item. No filler; every clause earns its place.

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 two-param read tool with fully documented params and readOnly annotations, the description covers the essential missing piece (return shape and the BodyHtml/BodyTruncated distinction). It does not mention error behavior for missing IDs, but nothing critical is absent.

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 both ticketId and commentId are already documented in the schema. The description adds no additional meaning about identifier format or scoping, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

Specific verb+resource ('Gets a single comment on a ticket') clearly states what it returns. It implicitly contrasts with the list variant ('a single comment'), but never names gorelo_list_ticket_comments or the parallel get_project_comment/get_project_task_comment siblings explicitly.

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 singular framing implies fetching one comment by ID rather than enumerating, which is enough to distinguish from the list tool. But there is no explicit when-to-use guidance, no mention of when to prefer the list endpoint, and no prerequisites stated.

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