get_comment_likes

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the behavioral burden. It discloses that this is a read-only GET operation via the endpoint path, but it does not mention authentication, permissions, rate limits, or pagination behavior beyond the schema.

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 contains the verb, resource, and endpoint. There is no filler or repetition, and every element contributes to understanding the tool.

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 simple list operation with an output schema, the description covers the core action, but it omits usage context such as how pagination works via 'after' and 'limit' and any authentication expectations. It is adequate but not fully self-sufficient.

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. The path template clarifies that comment_id is the comment identifier, but the after and limit parameters are not explained at all in the description, leaving their semantics ambiguous.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'List people who liked a comment' and reinforces it with the endpoint pattern 'GET /{comment-id}/likes'. This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like get_post_likes and get_comment_reactions.

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 gives clear context: use this tool to list likes on a comment. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the resource and action are unambiguous, so an agent can infer when to choose it.

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