vikunja_task_comments

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It indicates a write operation ('add comments') but does not disclose whether the tool also supports deletion, updating, or listing comments. No mention of side effects, permissions, or rate limits.

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 concise, but its brevity comes at the cost of completeness. It provides a basic purpose without wasting words, but could be more structured to separate overview from details.

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 four parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is insufficient. It lacks information on how to use `commentId`, what the response contains, and how this tool fits into the broader task comment workflow.

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%, so the description must clarify parameters. It only implies that `id` is a task ID and `comment` is text, but does not explain `commentId` (perhaps for deletion or update) or the `operation` enum. This leaves significant ambiguity.

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 'add comments to tasks', which identifies the primary action and resource. It differentiates from sibling tools like vikunja_task_crud that handle task CRUD, but 'manage' is a broad verb that slightly obscures the exact operation.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like vikunja_task_crud. No preconditions, exclusions, or context about comment lifecycle are provided.

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