Retrieve Comments

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description adds that the tool retrieves only unresolved comments and requires specific permissions, which provides additional context beyond annotations, but does not disclose other behavioral traits such as pagination limits (handled by schema) or response structure.

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 two sentences long, front-loaded with the core purpose, and contains no unnecessary words or redundant information. It efficiently conveys the essential information.

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?

Given the tool has 5 parameters and no output schema, the description is somewhat adequate but lacks details on pagination behavior or return format. The schema covers pagination, so the description is moderately complete but could better explain how the output relates to the user's need.

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% with descriptive parameter descriptions, so the description does not add significant meaning beyond the schema. The baseline of 3 applies as the schema carries the burden, and the description only briefly mentions the 'unresolved' aspect not tied to parameters.

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 retrieves a list of unresolved comments from a Notion page or block, using specific verbs and resources. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like notion_create_comment (write) or notion_retrieve_block (retrieves block details) by focusing on comments and specifying 'unresolved'.

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 mentions the prerequisite that the integration needs 'read comment' capabilities, which provides some context, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like notion_retrieve_block or notion_read_page, nor does it offer exclusions.

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