Resolve Pull Request Comment

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

Annotations already indicate this is non-destructive and idempotent. The description adds no behavioral context such as permissions, side effects, or that resolving collapses comments. It does not contradict annotations but provides no extra value.

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 short and to the point, listing arguments and return type without extraneous text. However, more detail could be included without sacrificing conciseness.

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 description meets basic needs but lacks context about what resolving means (e.g., marks comment as resolved, hides it). The output schema exists, so return details are not necessary, but the overall completeness is minimal.

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 0%. The description merely repeats parameter names without defining their purpose or format. For example, 'comment_id' is ambiguous—could be a numeric ID or a UUID. No added semantics.

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 explicitly states 'Resolve a comment on a pull request.' The name and title are clear, and the sibling tools include 'reopen_pull_request_comment' and 'delete_pull_request_comment', distinguishing this action as resolution.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. No context about prerequisites or typical scenarios. The description only lists parameters without any usage hints.

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