B3TR: Proposal comments

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

Annotations already indicate a safe, read-only operation. Description adds value by clarifying that comments are only from on-chain voters and that filtering by support type is supported. 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?

Description is concise but includes a valuable note about Discourse alternative. Could be slightly more structured, but every sentence 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 that an output schema exists, description need not explain return values. Covers purpose, usage, limitations, and filtering options. Complete for the tool's 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 coverage is 100%, so parameters are already well-documented. Description adds minimal extra meaning beyond the schema, only echoing the filter by support type. At baseline 3.

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 it gets on-chain voting comments/reasons for a specific B3TR proposal, specifying the API endpoint and distinguishing from broader community discussion. Verb 'get' and resource 'on-chain proposal comments' are specific.

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?

Provides explicit guidance: use for on-chain voter comments, and for broader community discussion, use Discourse tools. Mentions getDiscourseTopic as alternative and when to use it, along with providing forum URL for manual viewing.

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