Notes/Comments

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, non-destructive, and idempotent hints. The description adds value by explicitly stating that system notes and inline MR comments are included, providing behavioral context beyond annotations. No contradictions.

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?

Single sentence, 15 words, front-loaded with the verb 'Get' and resource. No redundant information; every word contributes to clarity.

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?

No output schema is provided, but the description does not explain what the returned notes contain or how they are ordered. While annotations and schema are rich, the description lacks details on pagination behavior or structure of the response, leaving some 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?

Schema coverage is 100% and all parameters are described in the schema. The description does not add additional meaning or usage guidance beyond the schema, meeting the baseline for high coverage.

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?

Description clearly states the tool retrieves notes/comments from issues or merge requests, specifying the resource and action. It distinguishes from sibling tools like create_note, delete_note, and search_notes by focusing on retrieval of all notes including system and inline 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?

While the description implies usage for fetching notes, it lacks explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like search_notes or get_merge_request_context. There are no when/ when-not statements or mentions of alternatives.

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