get_comments

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. 'Fetch' conveys a read-only operation, and 'oldest first' provides meaningful ordering behavior. It does not mention auth or pagination, but the output schema covers the return shape.

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?

Two tight sentences with no filler. The core action and ordering are front-loaded, followed by the parameter clarification. Every word earns its place.

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 single-parameter read tool with an output schema, the description is nearly complete: it gives the resource, ordering, and identifier format. The only minor gap is the absence of explicit guidance on when to choose this over sibling tools, but nothing essential to calling it correctly is missing.

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%, so the description must compensate. The line 'identifier: human issue identifier, e.g. GOV-123' adds crucial semantic meaning and an example that the raw schema lacks. It fully clarifies the only parameter without being verbose.

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 states a specific action ('Fetch'), a precise resource ('comments on a Linear issue'), and a useful ordering detail ('oldest first'). This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like get_issue, add_comment, and list_my_issues.

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 intended use case is clear: when you need an issue's comments, oldest first. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the read-only comment-fetching context is unambiguous enough to guide tool selection.

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