给 Bug 加备注（禅道 v1 REST 不支持，会报错）

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

The description discloses the critical behavioral trait: it will always return an error and will not simulate success. This goes beyond annotations (which don't indicate this) and is essential for the agent to avoid calling it. It also explains why (API limitation). Score 5.

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 front-loaded with the warning and alternatives, followed by the args. It's concise and to the point, though it repeats parameter names. Score 4.

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 that the tool is designed to fail, the description fully explains the failure mode and provides alternative actions. No additional information is needed for the agent to decide correctly. Score 5.

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?

The schema already provides descriptions for both parameters (Bug ID, 备注内容), and the description merely repeats them. The description adds no extra meaning beyond what the schema provides, so baseline 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?

The description clearly states the tool attempts to add a comment to a bug, but immediately discloses that the API does not support this and the tool will return an error. This is a distinct purpose from siblings (which actually perform actions), so the agent knows it's a non-functional stub. Score 4 because it's clear but not a positive action.

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?

Explicitly states when NOT to use it and provides alternatives: use Web UI or old session API. This is exactly the guidance needed to route the agent away from this tool. Score 5.

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