nexus_remove_comment_like

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

Beyond the annotations, the description discloses the rate-limit pool behavior ('Consumes the v2 GraphQL pool, NOT the v1 REST rate-limit quota') and the expected return shape. This adds useful behavioral context that is not present in the structured metadata.

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 compact, front-loaded with the core action, and every sentence earns its place: action, quota note, and return format. There is no redundant or filler text.

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 single-parameter, idempotent, non-destructive operation, the description is fully sufficient. The annotations cover mutation/idempotency/safety, the schema covers the parameter, and the description covers behavior and return format.

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?

The schema already fully documents comment_id with 100% coverage, including a clear description. The tool description adds no new param-level semantics, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 ('Remove'), a precise resource ('your like from a comment'), and the API channel ('v2 GraphQL'). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling operations like nexus_like_comment, nexus_create_comment, and nexus_discard_comment.

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?

That the tool is for removing the caller's own like is clear, so the usage is implied. However, there is no explicit guidance on when to choose this over the sibling nexus_like_comment, nor any mention of prerequisites beyond having a like to remove.

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