responder_comentario_instagram

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full burden. It discloses that the response is visible and public, which is important. However, it does not mention authentication requirements, rate limits, or whether the action is reversible. The warning adds some transparency but not complete.

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 extremely concise: two sentences (one for purpose, one for warning). Every word is necessary; no fluff. It's well-structured and easy to parse.

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 lacks information about the return value or success confirmation. For a simple action tool, it covers the main purpose and a key warning, but is not fully complete without output schema. It does not explain what the agent should expect after execution.

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% with clear parameter descriptions in the schema. The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema. According to rules, baseline 3 is appropriate when coverage is high and description adds no extra value.

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's action: 'Responde a un comentario de Instagram' with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings like 'listar_comentarios_instagram' (listing) and 'publicar_instagram' (new posts).

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 includes a warning: 'Publica una respuesta visible; confirmá el texto con el usuario.' This guides when to use (with caution and user confirmation). It doesn't explicitly say when not to use, but the sibling 'listar_comentarios_instagram' is implied as an alternative for non-destructive actions.

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