react_to_comment

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses that this is a WRITE operation and defaults to dry_run=true, but fails to explain whether it adds/toggles/removes reactions, what happens when 'on' is false, or any permission requirements.

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 front-loaded with 'WRITE', but it omits needed details. It is not overly verbose, but the brevity compromises clarity.

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, no annotations, and 6 parameters with 0% coverage, the description is incomplete. It lacks details about return values, side effects, and parameter behavior beyond kind and dry_run.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description must compensate. It explains 'kind' and 'dry_run', but leaves 'comment_id', 'reaction', 'on', and 'pub' undefined. This is insufficient for a tool with 6 parameters.

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 it is a WRITE action to react on a comment, with a default reaction. It distinguishes between two kinds of comments (post vs note), which helps avoid confusion with sibling tools like react_to_post.

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?

Provides guidance on setting the 'kind' parameter based on comment type and notes the default dry_run=true. However, no exclusions or alternatives are mentioned, and it doesn't clarify when to use this tool versus similar tools like delete_comment or comment_on_post.

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