create_list_comment

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

With no annotations provided, the description covers creation behavior, optional assignment, notification, and return value. It discloses that it returns the created comment's id, which is key behavioral info. No contradictions.

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 sentences, no wasted words. Front-loaded with the primary action, then optional features, then return info. Efficient and clear.

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 create comment tool, the description covers purpose, usage context (List-level), features (assign, notify), and return value (id). No output schema, but return is described. Completeness is high given tool complexity.

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 coverage is 100% and each parameter is described in the schema. The description adds value by explaining the optional assignment and notify behavior, linking parameters to real-world usage. It doesn't add detailed format but context is helpful.

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 'Post a new comment on a List' using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like create_task_comment by specifying 'List-level' and noting it's for notes not belonging to a specific task.

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 provides context on when to use: 'Use for List-level notes that don't belong to a specific task.' This indirectly helps differentiate from task-level comments. However, it doesn't explicitly mention when not to use or name alternative tools.

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