quire.listChatComments

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

Annotations include readOnlyHint=true, which the description aligns with by using 'List'. However, the description adds no additional behavioral details beyond listing comments, such as pagination, sorting, or return format. With annotations covering the safety profile, the description adds minimal extra transparency.

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 sentence that efficiently conveys the tool's purpose and two identification methods. No filler or redundant information, making it highly concise and well-structured.

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 list operation with no output schema, the description adequately specifies how to identify the chat but omits any mention of result ordering, pagination, or the structure of returned comments. This is acceptable for a basic list tool but could be more informative given the complexity of the input schema.

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 description coverage is 100% with each parameter having a clear description. The tool description does not add new meaning beyond what the schema already provides, such as data types or constraints (e.g., chatOid vs projectId+chatId mutual exclusivity is implied but not explicit).

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 chat channel, specifying two identification methods (by chatOid or by projectId+chatId). It effectively distinguishes from sibling tools like quire.listTaskComments by targeting chat comments specifically.

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 mentions two ways to identify the chat but does not provide explicit guidance on when to use one method over the other, nor does it state exclusions or alternatives. The usage context is clear but lacks direct instructions for choosing between chatOid and projectId+chatId.

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