confluence_comment_edit

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

Describes that the new body replaces current text, returns YAML, and mentions API endpoint differences for kind. No annotations exist, so description carries the burden; it would benefit from disclosing side effects (e.g., irreversible replacement) or auth needs. Adequate but not exhaustive.

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?

Concise at 5 sentences, each providing essential information without redundancy. Information is front-loaded with action and key constraints.

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?

Covers key operational aspects: required parameters, constraint on kind, mutual exclusivity, return format (YAML). Missing details on return value structure and error scenarios, but given simplicity of tool, 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%, baseline 3. Description adds valuable context: origin of comment_id, enumeration of kind values, mutual exclusivity detail, and markdown-to-ADF conversion. This extra semantics justifies a 4.

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 action (edit), resource (existing Confluence comment body), and identifier (by comment_id from confluence_comment_list). It distinguishes from siblings by specifying it edits rather than adds, deletes, or lists.

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?

Provides clear guidance on parameter constraints (kind must be footer or inline, mutual exclusivity of content and content_path). Mentions CLI mirror for familiarity. However, does not include prerequisites like edit permissions or conditions for use vs alternatives.

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