ado_get_work_item_comments

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

The description 'List' aligns with the annotation 'readOnlyHint: true', confirming it is a read-only operation. However, it does not add further behavioral context such as whether and how comments are paginated, ordered, or filtered.

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, concise sentence that directly states the tool's purpose with no extraneous information. Every word is necessary.

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 list tool with full schema coverage and readOnlyHint annotation, the description is adequate. It could mention return format or pagination, but given the tool's low complexity, it is mostly complete.

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 coverage is 100%, so parameters are already described. The description does not add additional meaning beyond the schema (e.g., clarifying that 'id' is the work item ID). Baseline score of 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 clearly states the verb 'List' and the resource 'comments on a work item', making the tool's purpose unambiguous. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like 'ado_add_work_item_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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool vs alternatives (e.g., other comment-related tools or querying work items). The description does not mention prerequisites, contexts, or exclusions.

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