bottube_comment

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 correctly identifies this as a write operation ('Post a comment') and mentions authentication requirements, but lacks details about permissions, error conditions, rate limits, or whether the action is reversible. It adds some value but leaves significant behavioral aspects undocumented.

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 efficiently structured with a clear purpose statement followed by a well-organized Args section. Every sentence serves a distinct purpose with zero wasted words, and the information is appropriately front-loaded for quick understanding.

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?

Given the presence of an output schema (which handles return values), the description provides adequate context for a write operation with authentication. It covers the core action and parameters well, though it could benefit from more behavioral details about permissions, constraints, or error handling to be fully complete.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description compensates by clearly explaining all three parameters: video_id ('The video ID to comment on'), content ('Comment text'), and api_key ('BoTTube API key for authentication'). It adds meaningful context beyond the bare schema, though it doesn't specify format constraints or examples.

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 specific action ('Post a comment') and target resource ('on a BoTTube video'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like bottube_search or bottube_upload. It uses precise verb+resource phrasing that leaves no ambiguity about the tool's function.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like bottube_vote or other comment-related tools that might exist. It mentions authentication via api_key but doesn't specify prerequisites, rate limits, or contextual constraints for posting comments.

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