confluence_update_inline_comment

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits, but it only says 'update or resolve' without explaining side effects, reversibility, permissions, or what 'resolve' actually changes. The agent has no idea of the impact of calling this tool.

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 sentence with no wasted words, but it is under-specified rather than concise. It omits essential information and provides little more than a restatement of the tool name, so the brevity is not a virtue.

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 5 parameters, 0% schema coverage, no annotations, and no output schema, the description must carry the full burden of context. It fails to explain the difference between updating and resolving, the meaning of representation values, or the max_chars constraint, leaving the agent dangerously uninformed.

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%, and the description mentions none of the five parameters (body, resolved, max_chars, comment_id, representation). The agent cannot infer the meaning or required format of any parameter, making correct invocation impossible without external documentation.

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 states a clear action ('Update or resolve') and a specific resource ('inline comment'), which is more informative than just the tool name. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like confluence_update_comment or explain what 'resolve' means, so it falls short of full clarity.

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 gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as confluence_update_comment or confluence_create_inline_comment. There is no context for choosing between update and resolve, nor any mention of prerequisites or typical scenarios.

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