get_comments

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

With no annotations, the description carries the transparency burden. It adds useful behavioral hints ('bounded', 'public', 'approved') but does not disclose default sort/depth/limit behavior, rate limits, or error responses. It provides some value but is not rich.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence that directly states the tool's purpose. No filler or redundancy, fitting for a straightforward tool.

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 4-parameter tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description is too sparse. It does not clarify what 'bounded' means in practice (the schema shows depth/limit limits but not how they affect results), what 'approved' implies for eligibility, or what the return structure looks like. The description leaves significant 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%, and the description only alludes to post_url ('from an approved Reddit permalink'). It does not explain the meaning or effect of sort, depth, or limit parameters, leaving the agent to infer from the schema alone. This fails to compensate for the lack of schema-level descriptions.

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 ('Get') and resource ('public comment tree from an approved Reddit permalink'), clearly distinguishing it from siblings like get_post (which would fetch the post itself). It also mentions key scoping constraints (bounded, public, approved).

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?

No explicit guidance is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_post, search_posts, or list_subreddit. The description implies it is for comment trees on a specific post, but does not state exclusions or prerequisites beyond needing a permalink.

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