pin_report_comment

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It reveals key behaviors: pinning is conditional on sign-off and mutually exclusive (only one pinned comment per instance). It does not detail error handling if a pin already exists, but the constraints are transparent enough for the agent to infer outcomes.

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 extremely concise at two sentences, front-loaded with the core action. Every sentence serves a purpose: first states the operation, second provides critical constraints. No unnecessary words or repetition.

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 (not shown, but indicated), the description does not need to explain return values. It covers the essential behavior: pinning a comment, the single-pin constraint, and the prerequisite condition (sign-off). For a simple CRUD-like tool, this is complete.

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 input schema has 100% coverage with descriptions for all three parameters. The tool description merely restates the general action without adding parameter-specific meaning beyond what the schema already provides. Therefore, it adds minimal semantic value beyond the baseline.

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 states the action ('Pin a comment') and the resource ('on a report instance'). It distinguishes from sibling tools like unpin_report_comment and create_report_comment by implying pinning as a distinct operation. The constraint of 'only one per instance' further clarifies its unique role.

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 description provides critical usage context: pinning is only allowed after sign-off and only one comment can be pinned at a time. It implicitly guides the user to consider unpinning if needed, though it doesn't explicitly list alternatives or when not to use. This is sufficient for a straightforward tool.

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