add_comment

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

Discloses that the author is the API token's owner (auth implication) and that threads are one level deep (behavioral constraint). No output schema or annotations, so description carries behavioral burden; could mention return value, but adequate.

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 efficient sentences covering action, parameters, auth, and usage. No unnecessary words, all sentences add value. Front-loaded with key information.

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 no output schema or annotations, description covers purpose, parameters, auth, and use case. Lacks mention of return value or error conditions, but sufficient for a simple comment creation tool.

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 descriptions already cover parameters well (100% coverage). Description adds nuance by explaining nodeId vs parentId distinction and thread depth, providing extra meaning beyond schema.

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 'Post a comment on a diagram' with specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings like list_comments and create_diagram by detailing node vs. parent parameters and threading behavior.

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 context for when to use ('leave structured review findings') and notes threading depth. Does not explicitly list when not to use or alternatives, but effectively implies using list_comments for reading.

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