metaculus_comments_feed

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It explicitly states that 'upstream comment bodies are not exposed' and that data is derived from credential-free public sources, which are important constraints beyond what the input schema reveals.

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?

Two sentences: the first clearly states the core purpose ('returns normalized Metaculus question rows'), and the second adds vital behavioral context (credential-free, no comment bodies). No wasted words.

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?

No output schema exists, so the description should better hint at the return format. 'Normalized Metaculus question rows' is vague; it does not specify fields or structure. Also missing pagination details beyond recency order. Adequate but could be more complete.

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?

Input schema has 100% description coverage for both parameters (limit and topic). The description does not add meaning beyond the schema; it only redundantly mentions 'default 10' in the first sentence? Actually, it doesn't mention parameter details. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 returns normalized Metaculus question rows for questions referenced by recent public comments, ordered by comment recency. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like metaculus_top_comments (which likely returns comment bodies) and metaculus_question (which returns individual question details).

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 implies the tool is for fetching questions that have recent comments, but does not explicitly state when to use this versus alternatives (e.g., metaculus_top_comments for actual comment text). The note about 'credential-free public Metaculus data' provides context but no exclusions.

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