Retry comment

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full behavioral burden. 'Publish ... now' implies a mutation, but it does not disclose whether the retry is idempotent, what happens if the comment was already published, or whether it only works on comments in pending/failed state.

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 short sentence with no filler. It is front-loaded with the action and the target state, making it easy to scan and process.

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 mutation tool with one parameter, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is too thin. It conveys the basic action but omits behavioral expectations, return behavior, and any retry-specific semantics an agent would need to call it correctly.

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%, and the description never mentions 'commentId' or explains how to identify the target comment. The phrase 'pending/failed comment' provides slight context, but the description does not compensate for the schema's complete lack of parameter documentation.

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 a specific verb ('Publish') and resource ('pending/failed comment') and clearly conveys that this tool retries an existing comment rather than creating a new one. This distinguishes it from siblings like create_comment and retry_post, though it does not name them explicitly.

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 implies the intended condition for use: a comment that is pending or failed and should now be published. However, it does not explicitly say when not to use this tool versus alternatives like update_comment or create_comment.

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