penpot_resolve_comment_thread

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It explains the toggle behavior and UI implication (hidden vs. accessible), but lacks details on permissions, reversibility, or error cases. The disclosure is adequate for a simple operation.

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, no fluff. The key action and Boolean usage are front-loaded. Every word adds value.

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's simplicity (2 params, no output schema), the description covers the essential behavior and UI consequence. It could mention error handling or required permissions for completeness, but this is not critical for a toggle operation.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It explains the `isResolved` parameter with examples (`true` for resolved, `false` for reopen). The `id` parameter is implied as thread ID, but not explicitly documented.

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 verb 'Mark...as resolved or reopen it' and specifies the resource 'comment thread'. It distinguishes this tool from siblings like create, delete, and list by focusing on resolution toggling.

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 explicitly states when to use this tool (to resolve or reopen a thread) and provides context about UI behavior. It does not specify when not to use it or direct alternatives, but the sibling set covers other actions.

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