get_comments

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

No annotations are provided, so the description alone must carry behavioral disclosure. 'List' implies a read-only operation, but the description does not mention pagination, return format, authentication, rate limits, or whether only top-level comments are returned.

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?

One short sentence with no filler and the core scope front-loaded. It communicates the tool's job efficiently.

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 one-parameter read tool, this may be minimally sufficient, but the lack of an output schema and any mention of comment fields, ordering, or pagination leaves an agent without important retrieval expectations.

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?

The schema already documents media_id as 'Instagram media id' with 100% coverage. The description's 'on a media item' reinforces the connection but adds no further semantic detail.

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 uses a specific verb ('List') and a clear resource ('comments on a media item'). It is unambiguous and visibly distinct from sibling tools that reply to, hide, or delete comments.

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 usage is implied: use it when you want to retrieve comments for a media item. However, it does not explicitly state exclusions or alternatives, so the agent must infer the boundary against siblings.

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