jira_update_comment

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

With only readOnlyHint=false, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure but offers nothing beyond the name. It does not explain that this replaces comment text, requires specific permissions, or what the response contains. This is a critical gap for a mutation tool.

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 three words, which is concise but under-specified rather than efficient. It does not front-load any useful information beyond the obvious.

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?

Given a mutation tool with no output schema (though output schema exists, the description doesn't reference it), and the need for at least basic behavioral context, the description is completely inadequate. It fails to note that the body parameter replaces the existing comment text or that the commentId must be obtained from jira_list_comments, which is critical for correct invocation.

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 the schema already documents key, commentId, and body with useful details (e.g., comment ID source, wiki markup on Jira Server). The description adds nothing, but baseline 3 is appropriate when the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 'Update a comment' is essentially a tautology that restates the tool name (jira_update_comment). It adds no specifics about which comment or in what context, failing to distinguish from siblings like jira_add_comment or jira_delete_comment beyond the generic verb 'update'.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as jira_add_comment (for new comments) or jira_delete_comment. The description provides no context, prerequisites, or exclusions.

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