clickup_get_task_comments

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It implies a read-only operation ('Get') and notes pagination support via start/start_id, but does not explicitly state safety (read-only), default page size, ordering, or error behavior. It does hint that only top-level comments are returned (by directing replies to another tool), which is useful but not fully spelled out.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose, followed by the alternative condition and pagination note. Every sentence adds actionable information with zero waste.

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 read tool with no output schema, the description covers the essential aspects: what it returns (comments with reply_count), when to use a sibling, and pagination. It omits finer details like default page size or error handling, but is sufficient for correct selection and invocation.

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%, so the schema already documents all four parameters thoroughly. The description reinforces pagination via start/start_id but adds no syntax or semantics beyond what the schema provides. Baseline 3 is appropriate when the schema does the heavy lifting.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Get task comments') plus a key return detail ('with reply_count per comment'). It explicitly distinguishes itself from the sibling 'clickup_get_threaded_comments' by directing the agent to that tool for replies, so an agent can tell them apart without opening schemas.

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?

Gives an explicit alternative: 'Use clickup_get_threaded_comments for replies when reply_count > 0.' This is a clear when-to-use-other condition. It does not cover all possible alternatives (e.g., whether to use this vs. a general task fetch), but the main sibling is handled well.

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