weeek_add_comment

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It states the mutation ('Add') and markdown format, but omits auth requirements, rate limits, whether comments appear as the authenticated user, and what happens on success or failure. The disclosure is very thin.

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 single sentence is front-loaded, waste-free, and appropriately sized for a simple two-parameter tool.

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 mutation with complete parameter schema, the description provides enough to call the tool correctly. The only minor gap is the absence of return-value information, since no output schema exists, but an agent can still invoke it reliably.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description repeats the markdown format but adds no syntax, constraints, or examples beyond what the schema already documents for taskId and markdown.

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 specific verb ('Add') and resource ('comment to a task'), distinguishing it from sibling tools such as weeek_list_comments and other task operations. An agent can identify the tool's function immediately without opening the schema.

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 purpose implies when to use the tool (to add a comment to a task), but there is no explicit when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no alternatives named. With only one comment-adding sibling, the implied usage is minimally adequate.

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