Get one comment

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, covering the operation's safety profile. The description adds value by disclosing what the response contains—source and rendered HTML—which is useful since there is no output schema. It does not detail error cases or missing-comment behavior, but the low annotation burden makes this acceptable.

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?

A single, directly structured sentence that communicates action, target, and return content with no filler. The key phrase 'single comment by id' is front-loaded, making the tool's purpose immediately scannable.

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 simple get-by-id tool with one fully documented required parameter and a readOnlyHint annotation, the description is sufficiently complete: it names the resource, the lookup key, and the returned content. No output schema is present, but the description compensates by stating the primary output fields.

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?

The schema already fully documents comment_id with type, range, and description at 100% coverage. The description's 'by id' merely maps to this parameter and adds no new semantic detail beyond what the schema provides, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 ('Returns') and names the exact resource ('a single comment by id'), further specifying the response shape ('with its source and its rendered HTML'). This clearly distinguishes it from comment collection or mutation tools like list_comments, create_comment, update_comment, and delete_comment.

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 intent is clear: use this tool when you have a specific comment ID and want that one comment's data. It does not explicitly mention alternatives like list_comments for retrieving multiple comments, but the 'single comment by id' phrasing provides strong contextual guidance without exclusions.

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