add_comment

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

With no annotations, the description should disclose key behaviors. It notes that text supports markdown, but omits critical details such as required permissions, side effects, or return value. The agent lacks insight into the tool's safety profile.

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 extremely concise and well-structured. The purpose is stated upfront, followed by a clear list of parameters. Every sentence serves a purpose with no redundancy.

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?

Despite having an output schema, the description does not mention return values or error conditions. Given the tool's moderate complexity and 0% schema coverage, more context is needed, such as whether the comment is added immediately or if there are rate limits.

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 provides brief but useful clarifications: issue_id is 'Issue ID or URL', text is 'Comment text (markdown)', and instance is optional. While not exhaustive, this adds value over the bare schema titles.

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 'Add a comment to a YouTrack issue' with a specific verb and resource. It effectively distinguishes from sibling tools like update_comment, delete_comment, and find_comments, which serve different purposes.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not provide when-not-to-use or mention related tools for editing or deleting comments, leaving the agent to infer usage without explicit context.

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