ig_comments

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It adds the useful detail that replies are included in the result, but says nothing about read-only nature, permissions, pagination, ordering, or volume of comments 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?

It is a single short clause with no filler, which is front-loaded, but the brevity comes at the cost of under-specification rather than true efficiency.

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?

With no annotations and no output schema, the description is the only behavioral evidence an agent has, and it does not say what structure the comments come back in or how large a result to expect. For a read tool with a single required id, this leaves meaningful gaps.

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. 'on a media id' does tell the agent that the single parameter is an Instagram media identifier, but it gives no format, source, or validity guidance for that id.

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?

It identifies the resource (comments plus their replies on a media item), which distinguishes it from ig_reply, but the phrase is a bare noun fragment with no verb. An agent must infer that this retrieves comments rather than posts or moderates them.

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?

There is no statement of when to use this versus siblings such as ig_media_list, ig_reply, or ig_check_media. The reader is left to guess the selection condition entirely.

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