Get pull request comment

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only restates the basic fetch operation without mentioning authentication, read-only nature, error handling, or what the response contains. This is minimal and doesn't add meaningful transparency.

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 redundant words. It conveys the core function immediately.

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?

Since there is no output schema, the description should clarify what is returned, but it does not. The description is adequate for a simple fetch but leaves gaps regarding the response format and any subtle behaviors. For a tool with no annotations and no output schema, more context is needed.

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 already documents repoSlug, workspace, and pullRequestId with descriptions, giving 75% coverage. The description itself does not discuss parameters, but the schema covers most meaning. CommentId lacks a description, but the tool's purpose makes it clear. Baseline 3 is appropriate given high schema coverage.

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 uses the specific verb 'Fetches' and specifies the resource as a single comment on a pull request, triaged by ID. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like list, create, update, and delete comments.

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?

The description implies the tool is for retrieving a specific comment by ID, but it does not explicitly state when to use it instead of bb_list_pull_request_comments or mention any exclusions. The purpose is clear but no explicit guidance is given.

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