list_comments

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the read-only, non-destructive behavior is covered. The description adds no extra behavioral context such as rate limits or authentication requirements, so it meets but does not exceed the baseline for tools with annotations.

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 concise sentences, with the main purpose front-loaded. It avoids unnecessary detail and stays focused, making it easy to scan and understand.

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 description explains the output format (comments with author and mentions), the ordering (oldest first), and the required parameters. Given the tool's simplicity and the absence of an output schema, it provides enough context for correct invocation without over-explaining.

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% for all 4 parameters, so the baseline is 3. The description adds value by explicitly tying itemId to query_items and clarifying that projectId and itemId are required, which helps the agent understand how to obtain them.

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 ('List'), the resource ('comments on an item'), and the ordering ('oldest first'). It also clarifies that each comment includes author and @mentions, distinguishing it from other comment tools like add_comment or delete_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 a useful usage hint by telling the agent to get itemId from query_items. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use this tool, so it falls short of fully explicit guidance.

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