Get Page Comments

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

The annotation readOnlyHint=true already signals a safe read operation, so the description doesn't need to restate that. However, it adds no behavioral context beyond the literal action—no mention of pagination, response shape, or any side effects. The bare statement adds minimal value beyond the annotation.

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, front-loaded sentence with no filler words. It is appropriately concise for a simple read endpoint, though it could be slightly more informative without becoming verbose.

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?

With a rich output schema, complete parameter descriptions, and annotations indicating read-only, the description's brevity is acceptable. However, it lacks any high-level context about pagination or the need to provide a page identifier, which the schema covers indirectly. It is adequate but minimal.

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 input schema provides 100% coverage, with each parameter described in detail (e.g., slug/page_id mutually exclusive, cursor for pagination, fetch_all behavior). The description itself adds no parameter explanation, but the schema fully compensates, meeting the baseline of 3.

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 action ('Get') and the resource ('comments for a Yandex Wiki page'). It distinguishes itself from siblings like page_add_comment and page_get by specifying exactly what is retrieved.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It neither mentions exclusions nor describes scenarios where this tool is preferred over siblings like page_get or page_get_resources. The name implies usage, but explicit context is absent.

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