list_pr_comments

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 merely says 'List all comments', implying a read operation but offering no details about pagination, ordering, inclusion of inline comments, or response structure. This is minimal beyond the name.

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 extremely concise, with a one-sentence purpose followed by a simple list of arguments. It is front-loaded and contains no unnecessary words, making it highly efficient.

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?

The tool has a clear purpose, parameter list, and an output schema exists to describe return values. However, it lacks usage context, behavioral details, and a note that workspace and repo are optional with defaults. For a simple listing tool, it is minimally viable but has clear gaps.

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?

The schema has 0% description coverage, so the description must compensate. It does provide brief explanations for each parameter (pr_id: PR ID number, workspace: Workspace slug, repo: Repository slug), adding meaning beyond the schema's type-only fields. However, it does not mention that workspace and repo have defaults or clarify formats, so it is adequate but not comprehensive.

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 'List all comments on a pull request', using a specific verb (List) and a distinct resource (comments on a PR). This differentiates it from siblings like delete_pr_comment, comment_on_pr, and reply_to_pr_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?

The description provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like pr_activity or pr_diff. It only states what it does, leaving the agent to infer the appropriate context without any exclusions or prerequisites.

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