Add comment

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. 'Add a comment' implies a mutating operation, but it does not disclose permissions, idempotency, whether the comment is appended or replaces existing comments, or what the response will contain.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence with no filler. Every word contributes to the core action and target.

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 two-parameter mutation with no output schema, this is adequate but minimal. It covers the basic action, but omits any guidance on return values, edge cases, or behavioral expectations beyond the literal sentence.

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%, so both documentId and body are already documented in the schema. The description adds no additional parameter-level meaning, which matches the baseline of 3.

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 uses the clear verb 'Add' with a specific resource ('comment') and target ('document'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like delete_document or list_comments, though it does not explicitly name alternatives.

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?

Usage is implied: use this tool when you need to add a comment to a document. However, there is no explicit guidance on when to choose this over list_comments or how it relates to update_document, leaving some inference to the agent.

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