add-change-request-comment

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears the full burden of explaining behavioral consequences. It conveys that a comment is created, but says nothing about permissions required, whether the comment is appended to a thread, response format, or side effects such as notifications or state changes.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence states the verb and object without filler. Every word earns its place.

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 mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, this one-liner is under-specified. An agent is left without guidance on when to use it, what the response is, or any constraints beyond those in the schema.

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 only 50%, and the description adds no parameter-level meaning beyond what the schema already states. It does not mention that requestBody.body carries the comment text or explain how changeRequestId selects the target.

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 opens with a specific verb 'Adds' and names the exact resource ('a new comment to the Change Request'), making the operation unambiguous. The word 'new' also distinguishes it from update-change-request-comment and delete-change-request-comment even without naming them.

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 states only what the tool does and gives no guidance on when to choose it over the sibling comment tools (get/update/delete-change-request-comment) or related change-request actions. No prerequisites or contextual triggers are mentioned.

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