get_task_comments

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

No annotations are provided, but the description discloses key behaviors: ordering (newest first), returned data fields, and pagination support via start/start_id. It is upfront about the read-only nature and pagination mechanics.

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?

Three sentences, each carrying essential information: purpose, return fields, usage guidance, and pagination. No redundancy or fluff. Front-loaded with the core purpose.

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 list tool with no output schema, the description adequately covers what the tool does and returns. It explains the pagination mechanism. Could mention any limits (e.g., max page size), but overall complete enough.

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%, so the parameters are well-documented. The description adds moderate value by explaining how to use pagination ('Use the date of the oldest comment already fetched' for start) and the fallback for team_id. This goes slightly beyond 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 clearly states the tool lists comments on a task, newest first, and specifies the returned fields (id, text, author, etc.). It distinguishes from sibling tools like get_list_comments or get_threaded_comments by focusing on task comments and ordering.

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?

Provides explicit usage context: 'Use to read a task's discussion history before replying or to audit activity.' This guides the agent on when to use it. While not listing specific alternatives, the context is clear and sufficient.

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