nexus_hide_comment

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

Annotations already signal mutation/destruction (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=true), and the description adds useful context: required permissions, v2 GraphQL, and the return shape ({comment: {id}} or error). It does not contradict the annotations, though it does not elaborate on the visibility side effects of hiding beyond the word itself.

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?

Two compact sentences front-load the operation and permission, then give the return shape with no filler. 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?

For a 3-param mutation with complete schema coverage and an output summary, the description covers the essentials: operation, permission, API, and return format. It lacks any note about reversibility or relation to restore/discard, which would make it fully self-contained.

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 100%, and each parameter (reason, comment_id, internal_reason) already has a meaningful description in the schema. The tool description adds no parameter-specific detail, so it meets but does not exceed the baseline.

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 action ('Hide') and resource ('a comment'), plus moderator permission and API version, which makes the operation recognizable. It does not explicitly differentiate from sibling comment-moderation tools like nexus_discard_comment or nexus_lock_comment, so it stops short of a 5.

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?

Only the prerequisite 'moderator permissions required' is given; there is no guidance on when to choose hide over discard, restore, lock, or clear moderation status. The agent must infer usage from the name and schema, with no exclusions or alternatives named.

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