task_comments_list

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

Discloses cursor-based pagination but omits ordering direction, whether comments are nested or flat, or if any authorization is needed. With no annotations, the description should provide more behavioral context.

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?

Single sentence of 11 words, front-loaded with action and resource, no unnecessary words. Highly concise.

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?

Adequate for a list tool with schema-only parameters, but lack of output schema and no mention of return format (e.g., fields like author, timestamp) leaves gaps. Could be more complete for an agent.

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 covers all parameters with descriptions; the description adds context for the cursor parameter by mentioning cursor-based pagination, but does not go beyond schema definitions. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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?

Clearly states it gets comments for a task with a specific style (chat) and pagination method, distinguishing it from sibling tools like task_comments_detail. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from other list tools like tasks_list.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives such as task_comments_detail for a single comment or tasks_list for task details. The 'chat style' hint is implicit but not actionable.

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