delete_comment

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It discloses irreversibility and authorization requirements (403 if not author/admin). It does not mention rate limits or side effects, but for a delete operation the core behavior is well covered.

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 concise sentences, no fluff. Key information (action, resource, prerequisites, warning) is front-loaded and every word serves a purpose.

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 3-parameter delete tool with no output schema, the description is nearly complete. It covers the essential behavioral aspects and usage guidance. A minor gap is no explicit mention of the return value (typically empty), but this is acceptable.

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 coverage is 100% with descriptions for all three parameters. The description adds meaning by clarifying that `id` is the comment ID (not issue index) and should come from list_comments. This enhances understanding beyond 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 states it deletes a comment by its `id`, distinguishing it from the issue `index`. It specifies the resource (comment) and the action (delete), and among sibling tools like delete_issue and delete_label, it is unambiguous.

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 explicit guidance: use the `id` from list_comments, warns it is irreversible, instructs to confirm with the user first, and notes that only the author or admin can delete (403 otherwise). This covers when to use, prerequisites, and alternatives.

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