get_unanswered_comments

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It clearly states 'Read-only' and explains the filtering logic (filters out branches if user replied). It could add more details like pagination behavior or auth implications, but it sufficiently discloses key behavioral traits.

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 two sentences and a brief workflow hint. It front-loads 'Read-only' and the filtering logic, with no unnecessary words. Efficient and well-structured.

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 and no annotations, the description covers the filtering logic and use case but fails to document parameters or return format. It provides workflow guidance but not enough for an AI agent to fully understand input semantics.

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?

The input schema has 0% description coverage, and the description does not explain any parameters (post_id, pub, limit). It relies entirely on parameter names, leaving 'pub' ambiguous. The description should at least clarify the role of each parameter.

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 'Return comments on a post where the authenticated user has NOT yet replied', specifying the verb, resource, and unique filtering. It also distinguishes itself from the sibling tool 'list_comments' by mentioning the alternative for full unfiltered tree.

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?

Explicitly describes when to use it as 'the canonical worklist tool' and provides a workflow: read, draft, propose_reply, confirm_reply. It also advises when not to use it by pointing to 'list_comments' for the full tree.

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