notion_get_comments

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the transparency burden. It discloses that the tool returns comment text, author, and timestamps, and implies a read-only operation. However, it doesn't mention pagination, error behavior, or permissions. For a simple read tool this is adequate but not rich.

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 concise and front-loaded. The first sentence states the main action, followed by a useful detail about returned fields, a usage guideline, and a parameter explanation. Every sentence contributes value without redundancy.

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 tool with one parameter and an output schema, the description is complete. It explains what the tool does, what it returns, when to use it, and what the parameter means. Given the low complexity, no additional details are needed.

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 input schema has one parameter (page_id) with no description, and schema coverage is 0%. The description compensates by explicitly explaining 'page_id: the page to get comments from.' This adds clear meaning beyond the bare parameter name, which is valuable for correct invocation.

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 tool's function: 'Get all comments on a Notion page.' It specifies a precise verb (Get), resource (comments on a Notion page), and scope (all comments). The addition 'Use this to read discussion threads' reinforces the purpose and differentiates it from sibling tools that add, update, or delete comments.

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 gives a clear context for use: 'Use this to read discussion threads on a page.' While it doesn't explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, the read-focused language makes it obvious that this is for reading rather than modifying comments. The context is sufficient for selecting this tool over its mutating siblings.

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