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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=true, so 'Read only; no spend' largely restates them, though the spend clarification is useful context for the confirm/requestId parameters. Nothing is said about pagination via cursor, rate limits, or whether hidden/deleted comments are included — gaps the annotations don't cover.

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 short sentences are front-loaded and waste little, but the trailing 'Fields: soclo://tools/soclo_ads_get_ad_comments' is an opaque pointer that conveys nothing an agent can act on, so a non-trivial share of the text doesn't earn its place.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description should at least sketch what a comment record contains and how pagination terminates. With six parameters, a nested object, and half the schema undocumented, the definition is too thin for an agent to call this confidently.

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 only 50% and the description contributes zero parameter information. It doesn't clarify the relationship between accountId, adAccountId, and parameters.adId, nor the meaning of cursor/limit/since/until/placement, or why confirm/requestId exist on a read-only tool.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('List comments on an ad'), which is enough to separate it from siblings like soclo_ads_delete_ad_comment, soclo_ads_hide_ad_comment, and soclo_ads_reply_to_ad_comment. It doesn't explicitly name those alternatives, but the read/list framing is unambiguous.

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 only usage signal is 'Read only; no spend', which hints that confirmation/spend flows don't apply but never says when to pick this over the related comment tools (delete, hide, reply). No prerequisites, no exclusions, no alternative routing.

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