List comments

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description contributes nothing further: no pagination or ordering behavior, no indication of what a comment record contains, and no note on whether comments are public or scoped to approvers.

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 short clauses with zero filler and the resource and endpoint front-loaded. It is efficient, though it leans heavily on the URL path as its information carrier instead of stating the scope in prose.

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 one-parameter read-only list tool with annotations covering the safety profile, the definition is minimally sufficient to invoke correctly. With no output schema, however, the description should at least hint at the returned shape and whether results are paginated, and it does not.

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%, so the description carries the burden for the single 'id' parameter, and it partially does so by revealing through the URL path that id is an approval ID rather than a workspace or comment ID. However, it gives no format or example value for that ID.

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 pairs a specific verb ('List') with a specific resource ('comments') and, via the embedded endpoint path GET /v1/approvals/{id}/comments, makes clear the comments are scoped to one approval. That implicitly separates it from the sibling approvals_comment (which writes a comment), though the description never names that sibling 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?

There is no guidance on when to call this versus alternatives such as approvals_list or approvals_comment, and no stated preconditions (e.g., that the approval must be visible to the caller). The embedded endpoint path is the only hint about context.

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