update_document_comment

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

Beyond annotations (idempotentHint=true), the description adds that only the 'resolved' attribute is patchable, resolving root resolves the thread, and that replying 400s. No contradictions; thoroughly discloses behavior.

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?

Two concise paragraphs, front-loaded with purpose, each sentence adds unique information (operation, restrictions, idempotency, error handling). No filler.

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 and an output schema exists, the description fully covers operation, constraints, error conditions, 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?

With 100% schema coverage, the description adds extra value: clarifies comment_id format from list_document_comments, explains dry_run, and specifies the only patchable attr is 'resolved'. Significantly aids parameter understanding.

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 a single document comment' with specific verb and resource, and distinguishes from sibling tools like create_document_comments and list_document_comments by focusing on update. The patch detail reinforces the specific 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?

Provides explicit guidance on when to use (root comments only) and warns about replies causing a 400 error. Mentions idempotent behavior. Lacks explicit when-not-to-use or alternative tool names, but effectively guides usage.

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