word_resolve_comment

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

Discloses that resolution state is stored in XML, and if a reply comment ID is supplied, the root thread comment is updated. Also mentions output_path defaults to overwriting input. These details add value beyond annotations, which only indicate readOnlyHint and destructiveHint.

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?

Description is structured with Args and Returns sections, but includes some implementation details (XML storage) that may not be essential for an agent. Generally concise and clear.

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?

No output schema, and return value is described vaguely as 'Status dictionary with thread resolution details'. Covers main behavior well but lacks precise return value specification for a write operation.

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%, but description adds context: explains 'resolved' parameter meaning, defaults for 'output_path', and suggests 'comment_id' source from word_get_comments. Enhances understanding beyond schema alone.

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 'Mark a Word comment thread as resolved or open', specifying the verb (resolve) and resource (comment thread). It includes details about storage location and behavior with reply comment IDs, distinguishing it from siblings like word_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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives (e.g., word_reply_comment). The description hints at usage by mentioning resolving threads but lacks 'when to use' or 'when not to use' statements.

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