createNotionComment

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It clearly states the action (adding a comment) and the content type (plain text), which implies a write operation. However, it does not mention permissions, error behavior, or whether the comment is returned.

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, well-structured sentence that is immediately informative and free of waste.

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?

For a simple tool with two fully described parameters and a clear action, the description is adequately complete. However, since there is no output schema, it does not disclose the return value or side effects beyond the action itself, which is a minor gap.

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 schema covers 100% of parameters with descriptions ('Text content of the comment' and 'ID of the page to comment on'). The description adds only the 'plain text' qualifier, which slightly enriches the text parameter but does not substantially exceed 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 uses a specific verb ('Adds') and a clear resource ('a plain text comment to a Notion page'), making it unambiguous. It distinguishes from sibling comment tools (e.g., addJiraComment, createLinearComment) by naming Notion as the target.

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 usage (when you want to comment on a Notion page) but does not explicitly state when to choose this over alternatives, nor does it mention any prerequisites or exclusions. Sibling tools like createNotionPage are not referenced for differentiation.

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