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

Beyond the destructive/readOnly annotations, the description explains the visible effect: the text disappears, readers see a moderator-removal notice, and replies remain. It also discloses error behavior, default confirmation, and owner approval, which are important operational details.

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 front-loaded with the core action and then adds only decision-relevant details. Every sentence contributes to correct tool selection or invocation.

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?

For a destructive one-parameter mutation tool with no output schema, the description covers the important behavior: effect on readers, retained replies, sibling distinction, error case, confirmation, and approval. Nothing critical for an agent to call it correctly appears to be missing.

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 100%, and the single comment_id parameter is already documented as coming from list_comments. The description adds useful context about whose comment can be removed, but it does not add parameter-level syntax or format details beyond the 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 states a specific verb and resource, scopes it to comments on your publication, and directly distinguishes it from the sibling delete_comment. An agent can tell exactly what operation this performs without opening the schema.

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?

It explicitly says to use delete_comment for your own comments and explains that commenting on someone else's post returns an error. The moderator-only context and confirmation behavior further clarify when this tool applies.

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