delete_card_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 only states the action without mentioning potential side effects, irreversibility, authorization needs, or error conditions. This is a minimal statement that adds no behavioral insight beyond the obvious 'delete' implication.

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 a single, clear sentence with no redundant information. It is well-structured and easy to parse, earning full marks for conciseness.

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 delete operation with two parameters, the description is adequate but minimal. It provides no context about safety, permissions, or side effects, which would be expected given no annotations. The presence of an output schema is not enough to compensate for the lack of behavioral context, but the simplicity of the operation prevents a lower score.

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%, and the description adds little meaning beyond the parameter names. 'Delete a comment from a card' only implies that card_id identifies a card and comment_id a comment, but does not explain the relationship or any constraints. The description fails to compensate for the lack of schema 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 'Delete a comment from a card' uses a specific verb ('delete') and identifies the resource ('comment from a card'), clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools that create, update, or list comments. It is concise and 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?

No usage guidance is provided. The description does not mention when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor any prerequisites (e.g., comment must exist, permissions required). The value is essentially the same as the tool name, offering no additional context for selection.

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