get_comments

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says 'List comments' and reveals output fields; it does not disclose how the optional account parameter affects behavior, whether hidden comments are returned or filtered, pagination behavior, or any authentication or rate-limit context.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence states the core operation and the returned fields with no filler. The parenthetical list is compact 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 is minimally adequate for a simple read operation: it identifies the resource and required media_id can be inferred. However, it lacks guidance on the optional limit and account parameters, has no usage alternatives, and provides no behavioral context beyond listing fields. An output schema exists, but the description still leaves notable gaps.

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 0%, so the description must compensate by clarifying parameters. It does not explain media_id, limit, or account at all. The parameter names and defaults exist in the schema, but the description adds no meaning beyond what is already structurally visible.

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 a specific action and resource: 'List comments on a media object.' It also enumerates the returned fields (text, username, timestamp, like_count, hidden), making the purpose concrete. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like reply_to_comment, hide_comment, and delete_comment.

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 intended use is implied: call this when you need the list of comments for a media object, as opposed to acting on a comment. However, the description does not explicitly state when to prefer this tool over alternatives, nor does it mention any exclusions or preconditions such as requiring access to the media object.

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