list_comments

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

With no annotations, the description fully discloses key behaviors: first-page-only limitation (truncation risk), ordering (oldest-first), and return fields (id, body, user, timestamps). This adds significant value beyond the input schema.

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?

Description is concise (three sentences) with a prominent warning about truncation. Every sentence adds value, and the structure is front-loaded with the core 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 simple list tool without output schema, the description covers all essential context: purpose, risk, ordering, and return fields. No gaps remain for an agent to use it effectively.

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%, so baseline is 3. The description references the 'index' parameter but does not add meaningful extra detail beyond the schema's description of 'Issue number'.

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 clearly states the action 'List comments on one issue by its `index`', specifying verb, resource, and key parameter. It distinguishes from sibling tools like create_comment, delete_comment, and list_issues.

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?

Provides clear context including risk of truncation due to missing pagination, and mentions oldest-first ordering. Lacks explicit when-to-use or alternatives, but the caution about truncation serves as a practical guideline.

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