meta_create_post_comment

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral transparency burden and does so well by warning that a successful call is the only confirmation and that reading comments back is not possible with a standard app. This is significant non-obvious behavior. It does not mention permissions or other side effects, but the key verification limitation is disclosed.

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 two sentences with no filler. The primary purpose is stated immediately, and the critical no-verification warning earns its place. Every word adds value.

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 two-parameter create tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description provides the essential behavioral context including the unverifiable-success caveat. It is complete enough for selection and invocation, though explicit parameter descriptions and auth prerequisites would make it fully robust.

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 for the two undocumented parameters. It does provide meaningful context: 'Page post' clarifies post_id, and 'outbound link in the first comment' implies message content. However, it does not explicitly map parameters or explain their formats, leaving some inference required.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Comment on a Page post'. It also clearly distinguishes the tool from the post-body workflow by emphasizing 'first comment rather than the post body', which separates it from sibling tools like meta_create_page_post and the Instagram tools.

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 for when to use this tool: when you want to place an outbound link in the first comment rather than the post body. It does not explicitly name an alternative tool or provide a when-not-to-use statement, but the context is strong enough that an agent can infer the intended use case.

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