post_comments

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses a quota cost (1 unit) and hints at additional costs for cache bypass, which is useful behavioral context. However, it lacks details on rate limits, authentication needs, error handling, or what the output looks like (e.g., comment structure).

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 a single, efficient sentence that front-loads the purpose and includes quota information. It avoids redundancy, but could be slightly more structured by separating purpose from behavioral notes.

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 8 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is moderately complete. It covers purpose and quota costs but misses details on output format, error cases, and usage context. For a tool with this complexity, it should provide more guidance to be fully adequate.

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%, so the schema fully documents all 8 parameters. The description adds no parameter-specific information beyond implying 'post' context for 'id' and 'channelId.' This meets the baseline of 3, as the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 purpose: 'Get post's comments or thread.' It specifies the action (get) and resource (post's comments/thread). However, it doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like 'comments' or 'post_details' beyond mentioning 'post's comments,' which is somewhat specific but not explicitly contrasted.

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. It mentions a quota cost, but doesn't specify prerequisites, exclusions, or compare it to sibling tools like 'comments' or 'post_details.' This leaves the agent without clear usage context.

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