jira_edit_comment

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It explicitly explains the two-step manual mode (preview first, then confirm_token to apply), which is a key behavioral trait. It could also mention error handling or what happens on invalid confirm_token, but the core behavior is disclosed.

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 two sentences that front-load the primary purpose and then concisely explain the manual mode. Every word earns its place, with no redundancy or filler.

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 tool with four well-documented parameters and no output schema, the description covers the essential context: what the tool does, the manual mode flow, and the role of confirm_token. No additional information is necessary for an agent to select and invoke the tool 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?

The input schema provides 100% coverage with parameter descriptions, so the bar for added value is moderate. The description adds meaningful context by explaining the relationship between parameters: without confirm_token, it previews; with it, the update applies. This clarifies when each parameter is needed beyond the schema's standalone descriptions.

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 clearly states the verb ('Edit') and resource ('existing Jira comment'), which distinguishes it from sibling tools like jira_add_comment. It also introduces the manual mode behavior, making the tool's purpose unambiguous.

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 when to use it: for editing existing comments, as opposed to adding. It mentions manual mode with a preview and confirm_token, but does not explicitly state when not to use it or name alternative tools, leaving a small gap.

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