get_comments

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the burden. It describes a read operation ('List') but does not disclose additional behavioral traits such as sorting order, inclusion of deleted comments, or rate limits. The pagination parameters in the schema are present, but the description adds no extra context.

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 a single concise sentence with no redundancy. It effectively communicates the tool's purpose without unnecessary detail.

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 list tool with no output schema, the description is fairly complete in stating the action and entity types. However, it does not hint at the response format or any default ordering, which would be helpful for an agent. Given the complexity and presence of pagination parameters, additional context about the output would improve completeness.

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 100% coverage with descriptions for all four parameters. The tool description does not add any supplementary meaning beyond what is already in the schema, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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') and the resource ('comments'), and specifies the entity types it applies to (task, deal, project). It effectively distinguishes from sibling tools like 'create_comment' (write operation) and other get tools (different entities).

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 implicitly clear (when you need to list comments for a specific entity), but the description does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it provide any exclusions or comparisons with sibling tools like 'get_tasks'.

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