update_document_comment

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

Describes key behaviors beyond annotations: 'Resolving the root resolves the whole thread' and 'Idempotent.' Annotations already indicate idempotentHint=true and destructiveHint=false, and the description adds context about thread-level effect. No contradictions.

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?

Three concise sentences with front-loaded purpose. Every sentence adds essential information: action, scope constraint, idempotent note. No redundancy.

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 6 parameters, full schema coverage, and output schema present, the description covers all critical behavioral points: purpose, usage guidelines, root-only constraint, thread resolution effect, and idempotency. No gaps.

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 coverage is 100%, base is 3. The description adds value by explaining that comment_id must be a root comment ID from list_document_comments, which is not in the schema. This clarifies parameter semantics beyond the schema.

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 'Resolve or re-open one document comment thread' with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings by specifying root comments only and differentiating from work item comments, as siblings include update_work_item_comment.

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?

Explicit guidance: 'Root comments only — replies cannot be updated; pick a root id (parent_comment_id=None) from list_document_comments.' This tells when to use (root comments) and where to get the id, and implies when not to use (replies).

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