List Comments

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of disclosing behavior. The verb 'list' implies a read-only operation without side effects, but the description does not explicitly state whether it is safe, how comments are ordered, or whether pagination exists. This is minimal but not misleading for a simple listing operation.

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, focused sentence of nine words, with no filler, repetition, or unnecessary information. It is concise and front-loaded, immediately conveying the tool's 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?

The tool has a simple one-parameter input schema and an output schema, which covers return values. The description is sufficient for a basic read operation, but it lacks notes on ordering or pagination behavior that could be relevant in some contexts, preventing a perfect score.

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 fully documents the sole parameter issueId with a description, so the baseline is 3. The description's phrase 'on an issue' aligns with the parameter but adds no additional semantic detail 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 'List all comments on an issue' clearly identifies the action (list), the resource (comments), and the scope (on an issue). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like addComment, updateComment, and deleteComment, making it unambiguous.

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 usage guidance is provided—there is no mention of when to use this tool versus alternatives or any exclusions. The context implies its use for retrieving comments on a specific issue, but it does not explicitly compare with other comment tools or note prerequisites.

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