create_comment

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=true, so the write and world-reaching nature is covered without the description. Beyond that, the description adds nothing: it does not say whether the comment is plain text or rich text, whether permissions on the page are required, or whether the comment is publicly visible, which matters for an open-world write.

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 with no filler or redundancy. It is efficient, though its brevity contributes to the other dimensions' gaps rather than reflecting deliberate scoping.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained, and annotations cover the safety profile. However, for a write tool with two fully undocumented parameters and an open-world hint, the description should specify identifier format, text handling, and permission expectations to be 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?

Schema description coverage is 0% for both parameters, so the description carries the full burden for page_id and text. It only implies 'page' and 'comment' generically and never clarifies identifier format (bare ID vs UUID) or whether text supports markup, so the schema gap remains unaddressed.

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 states a concrete verb and resource ('Add a comment to a Notion page'), so the agent knows exactly what action is performed and on what object. It does not differentiate itself from the sibling list_comments, but the create-vs-read distinction is largely self-evident from the wording.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool rather than list_comments or other comment-related operations. The description gives no preconditions, no mention of what happens if the target page is absent or inaccessible, and no alternatives.

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