List Comments

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and openWorldHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the useful behavioral detail that the result set can be either a post's comments or a comment's replies, but says nothing about pagination or result shape, which it leaves to the schema and output schema.

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 with no filler. The scope distinction is stated up front and every word earns its place.

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?

Annotations and an output schema cover safety and return values, and the schema documents most parameters, but the description is thin for a paginated listing tool: it does not explain how to traverse pages, when to prefer this over get_post, or what the ordering default implies.

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 80%, so the schema already documents page, after, limit, and order. The description adds a small amount of meaning by implying object_id can be either a post id or a comment id, but it does not explain cursor flow, ordering, or page resolution beyond what the schema says.

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?

States a specific verb (list) and resource (comments) and clarifies the two scopes: comments on a post or replies to a comment. That is clear enough to separate it from siblings like add_comment or get_post, though it never names a sibling explicitly.

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 when to call it (when you need the comment thread for a post or comment), but gives no explicit when-not conditions, no mention of prerequisites, and no pointer to alternatives such as list_posts or get_post.

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