Add a note to a review issue

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

No annotations beyond title. Description does not disclose behavior beyond adding a note (e.g., append vs replace, visibility, limits). Minimal for a write 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?

Two concise sentences, no wasted words. Front-loaded with action and example.

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?

No output schema; description doesn't explain return value or effect. Acceptable for simple 2-param tool but could note success indicator.

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?

Adds meaning to review_issue_id by referencing list_review_issues. Schema already describes note. Coverage gap is mitigated by tool description.

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?

Clearly states action ('Add a note') and resource ('release review issue'). Differentiates from siblings as no other tool adds notes.

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 example of when to use ('explain a fix or add context') and notes source for review_issue_id. Lacks explicit when-not-to-use, but context is sufficient.

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