Reply to an Instagram comment (private DM)

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the action but omits details like success/failure responses, rate limits, permissions, or character limits. This is minimal transparency for a mutation tool.

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 a single sentence that clearly conveys the purpose and a key relationship. It is front-loaded and contains no unnecessary words.

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 is relatively simple with 3 parameters and no output schema, but the description lacks information on return values, error handling, authentication, or rate limits. This is insufficient for an agent to fully understand the tool's behavior.

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% with descriptions for each parameter. The description adds value by linking comment_id to get_comments, but for 'user' and 'message' it merely restates schema info. Baseline is 3, and the added hint is minor.

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 clearly states the action ('send a private reply DM') and identifies the resource ('the author of an Instagram comment'). It also distinguishes from siblings like get_comments by specifying the source of comment_id.

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 implies usage context by noting that comment_id comes from get_comments, hinting at a prerequisite. However, it does not provide explicit when-not-to-use scenarios or alternatives among siblings.

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