Resolve or reopen a comment

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

The description discloses a key safety behavior: expectQuote is verified against the live comment so a wrong/stale id is refused, preventing accidental resolution of the wrong thread. This goes beyond the basic action, though it does not cover permissions or return values.

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 a single sentence, front-loaded with the core purpose followed by a concise explanation of the verification parameter. No unnecessary words or repetition.

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?

The description covers the primary action, the verification mechanism, and the prerequisite tool for obtaining the quote. It lacks information about return values or error handling, but with no output schema and moderate complexity, it provides sufficient context for an agent to invoke the tool correctly.

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 description adds meaning to expectQuote by explaining its source (list_comments) and its role in confirmation and verification, which the schema only labels as a snippet. It does not elaborate on commentId/documentId, but these are self-evident from context.

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 starts with 'Resolve (or reopen) a comment thread by comment id,' clearly stating the action and target. It distinguishes this from sibling tools like list_comments or add_comment by specifying the resolve/reopen action and the required comment id.

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?

It instructs the user to pass expectQuote, obtained from list_comments, and explains that it is verified, helping the agent know the expected prerequisite workflow. It warns against wrong/stale ids, but does not explicitly contrast with alternative tools or mention when not to use it.

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