x_post_hide_reply

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

Beyond the annotations, the description discloses that the operation is reversible and idempotent, and that the result reports the resulting hidden state. It also notes the read-only policy disabling the tool, which is useful operational context not present in the annotations.

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 compact and front-loaded: the main action appears first, followed by parameter clarifications and behavioral notes. Every sentence adds useful information, with no filler or redundancy.

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 tool has an output schema and complete parameter documentation. The description covers the ownership constraint, the parameter semantics, reversibility, idempotency, and the read-only policy, making it fully sufficient for an agent to select and invoke the tool correctly.

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 coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description clarifies that reply_id is the reply's own id/URL rather than the root post, and that action selects hide or unhide, but these mostly restate the schema descriptions rather than adding substantial new meaning.

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 opens with 'hide or unhide a reply to one of your own posts,' which states a specific verb, resource, and ownership constraint. It clearly distinguishes this tool from siblings like x_post_delete by focusing on the hide/unhide action rather than deletion.

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: it only works inside a conversation the authenticated account started, and it distinguishes the reply_id from the root post. It does not explicitly name alternatives or when-not-to-use, but for this tool the intended usage is clearly scoped.

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