jira_comment

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It explains the body format (ADF documents), the behavior of the 'full' parameter, and that mutations return minimal responses. It could be more explicit about error conditions or authorization, but overall it gives solid behavioral context.

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?

The description is relatively long but well-structured: a concise opening sentence followed by a clear breakdown of actions and the 'full' parameter. It is front-loaded with the main purpose. Slight verbosity could be trimmed, but it remains effective.

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?

Given the complexity (10 parameters, nested objects, enum action), the description covers the main use cases and parameter requirements. It lacks details on return values (no output schema), but mentions mutation responses are minimal. Adequate for most usage scenarios.

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?

With only 10% schema description coverage, the description adds substantial meaning to parameters. It explains each parameter's role per action, the enum values for 'action', and the 'full' parameter's effect. This far exceeds the minimal schema info.

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 the tool handles CRUD operations for comments on a Jira issue with specific verbs: list, add, update, delete. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like jira_attachment or jira_issue.

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 for each action, listing required and optional parameters. It also explains when to use the 'full' parameter and that mutation actions reject it. This helps the agent choose the correct action and parameters.

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