list_comments

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

The description starts with 'Read-only' to indicate non-destructiveness, and outlines the return structure (parent + replies, fields). No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden; it covers the key behavioral trait but does not mention potential limitations like pagination or rate limits.

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 sentences, no wasted words. The first sentence is front-loaded with 'Read-only' and the core purpose, followed by a clear alternative in the second sentence.

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?

The description covers the tool's purpose, scope, and a sibling alternative, but lacks explanation of the 'pub' parameter. For a simple list tool, the context is adequate but not fully complete.

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 schema has two parameters with 0% description coverage. The description does not explain the meaning of 'post_id' or 'pub', leaving the agent to infer from names alone. The 'pub' parameter especially lacks clarity.

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 the tool returns 'the full nested comment tree for a post' with specific fields, and explicitly distinguishes it from the sibling tool 'get_unanswered_comments'.

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 provides explicit guidance on when to use this tool (to get the full tree) and when to use an alternative ('get_unanswered_comments' for unread threads).

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