clm_get_shipment_comments

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true, so the safety profile is covered without the description. The description adds the behavioral context that the response includes commenter display info, but it discloses no ordering, pagination, or scoping details beyond 'all comments.' No contradiction with the read-only annotation.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with zero filler. The verb and resource appear first, and 'with commenter display info' earns its place by adding output context. Nothing could be trimmed without losing meaning.

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 100% schema coverage, read-only annotations, and an output schema present, the description covers the essentials. The 'all comments' scoping statement adds useful behavioral context, and nothing critical for invoking the tool 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 100%, so shipment_id is already documented as 'The shipment's id.' The description's 'on a shipment' phrasing loosely reinforces the parameter's role but adds no format, syntax, or semantic detail beyond the schema. Baseline 3 applies when the schema carries the weight.

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 verb ('List'), a precise resource ('comments posted on a shipment'), and adds a useful output detail ('with commenter display info'). This distinguishes it from sibling comment mutation tools (create/update/delete_shipment_comment) and other shipment read tools like clm_get_shipment_event_logs and clm_get_shipment_timeline.

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 usage context is implied by the verb 'List' and the readOnly annotation, but the description never explicitly states when to choose this over alternatives such as clm_shipment_command_create_shipment_comment or clm_get_shipment_event_logs. No when-to-use or exclusion guidance is provided; an agent must infer the use case from the name and sibling list.

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