add_mr_note

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

The description states 'dry_run=true by default,' which is a key behavioral trait that adds value beyond the annotations (readOnlyHint: false). This tells the agent the action does not execute by default and requires explicit confirmation, providing important nuance.

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 a single concise sentence with no wasted words. It is front-loaded with the purpose. A slightly longer description could improve clarity, but it is efficient for a simple tool.

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 low complexity (4 params, no output schema), the description covers the main action and the important dry_run behavior. It lacks details on return values or error handling, but the schema handles parameter details. Adequate for the context.

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% with descriptions for all parameters. The description adds minimal semantic value beyond the schema, only reiterating the dry_run default. Baseline 3 is appropriate as the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 tool's function: 'Add a comment to a merge request.' It uses a specific verb ('Add') and resource ('comment to a merge request'), which distinguishes it from sibling tools like add_epic_note (epic) and add_issue_note (issue).

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 does not explicitly provide usage guidelines or alternatives. However, the purpose is clear enough that an agent would infer when to use it (to comment on an MR) and when not (e.g., for issues or epics). No exclusions or context are given.

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