Reopen a resolved comment thread

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It simply restates the action without explaining side effects, required permissions, or what 'reopen' entails (e.g., whether the thread becomes editable again, if replies are allowed).

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 sentence with no redundant words or repeated information. It is appropriately minimal for a simple tool with one parameter.

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?

This is a simple one-parameter tool with a clear name and no output schema. The description covers the core purpose, but the lack of annotations and behavioral details means it does not fully explain the consequences of the action. It is adequate but leaves room for more context.

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% for the single parameter thread_id, which is fully described with an example source ('e.g., from list_comments'). The description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 'Reopens a previously-resolved thread' clearly states the specific verb (reopens) and resource (thread). It distinguishes itself from the sibling tool 'resolve_comment' by indicating the opposite action.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The context of sibling tools like 'resolve_comment' and 'list_comments' implicitly suggests a use case, but the description provides no when/when-not criteria or alternative recommendations.

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