penpot_get_comments

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

Describes return data (id, content, author, timestamps), which is behavioral. No annotations provided, so description carries burden. Does not disclose authentication or rate limits, but for a read-only operation, this is acceptable.

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?

Two sentences: first states purpose, second lists return fields. No fluff, front-loaded. Efficient and clear.

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 read tool with one parameter and no output schema, description covers operation and return data. Lacks details on pagination or ordering, but likely not needed for listing thread replies. Sufficient for low complexity.

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 has one parameter (threadId) with no description (0% coverage). Description mentions 'within a comment thread', linking to the parameter. Adds context about the thread context but doesn't explain format or requirement. Compensates for schema lack.

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?

Clearly states the action 'Get all reply comments' and the resource 'comment thread'. Distinguishes from sibling tools like penpot_list_comment_threads (lists threads) and penpot_create_comment (creates a 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?

Implies usage context ('within a comment thread') but does not explicitly state when to use this tool vs alternatives (e.g., when you have a thread ID from list_comment_threads). No exclusion or alternative mention.

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