Hide or unhide comments

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

The description goes beyond the annotations by explaining the social visibility semantics (author and friends still see it), the per-id outcome behavior, that already-deleted comments count as done, and the required token/task permissions. These details align with the annotations and materially shape an agent's expectations.

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?

Three focused sentences: the first gives the core action and cap, the second explains the moderation distinction, and the third covers outcome granularity and permissions. There is no filler, and the most decision-relevant information appears first.

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 complete enough for selecting and invoking the tool given the rich schema and annotations. It covers auth, batch limits, reversibility, and per-id outcomes; the only minor gap is the absence of an explicit return-format description, though the per-id outcome note softens this.

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 already documents all five parameters thoroughly. The description reinforces the `hidden` semantics and adds the per-id outcome behavior for `comment_ids`, but does not need to restate parameter-level detail; 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 names a specific action ('Hide or unhide') and resource ('comments') with a clear scope (up to 50 per call). It also explicitly distinguishes itself from the sibling facebook_delete_comment by framing hiding as the reversible moderation verb, so an agent can disambiguate it without opening schemas.

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?

It states exactly when this tool should be preferred: 'prefer it over facebook_delete_comment', and explains why via reversibility and non-destruction. It also gives operational constraints like batch size and notes the auth requirements, making the selection and invocation context explicit.

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