format_pr_comment

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

Describes outputs (results table, regression details, threshold status) but lacks details on side effects, permissions, or return format. With no annotations, the description carries full burden; some behavioral info is present but insufficient.

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?

Single sentence that is direct and informative. No redundant information, front-loaded with key action and resource.

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?

Sufficient for the tool's purpose given schema coverage, but lacks explanation of return value or behavior when optional parameters are omitted. With no output schema, more detail on what the function returns would improve completeness.

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 clear parameter descriptions. Tool description adds context about content of generated comment but doesn't clarify parameter usage beyond schema. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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?

Clearly states the tool generates a markdown PR comment from evaluation results, listing key components like results table and threshold status. Distinct from sibling tools which focus on evaluation metrics or comparisons.

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?

Implied use case for generating PR comments from evaluation outputs, but no explicit guidance on when to use vs siblings or when not to use. Does not exclude other use cases or provide context for selection.

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