community_post_comments

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. The description offers no information about whether this is a read or write operation, what permissions might be required, what the response format looks like, or any rate limits or constraints. It fails to provide any behavioral context beyond the tool name.

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?

While technically concise with just three words, this is under-specification rather than effective conciseness. The description fails to provide essential information about the tool's purpose and behavior, making it inefficient despite its brevity.

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 tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is completely inadequate. It provides no information about what the tool does, when to use it, what it returns, or how it behaves. Given the complexity implied by having a required cursor parameter, this minimal description leaves critical gaps in understanding.

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 100% description coverage, with the single parameter 'cursor' documented as coming from the 'Community Post Details endpoint.' The description adds no additional parameter information beyond what's already in the schema, so it meets the baseline score of 3 for adequate schema coverage.

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 'Community Post Comments' is a tautology that merely restates the tool name without specifying what action the tool performs. It doesn't indicate whether this tool creates, retrieves, updates, or deletes comments, nor does it distinguish this tool from sibling tools like 'community_post_details' or 'video_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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. With sibling tools like 'community_post_details' and 'video_comments' available, there's no indication of what distinguishes this tool's purpose or appropriate context for its use.

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