Hide Mod Comment

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

While annotations already mark the tool as destructive and non-read-only, the description adds valuable context about the actual behavior: it removes a comment from view for everyone except staff调和. It also discloses authorization limits ('mod's author for any comment on their mod') and session requirements, which go beyond the annotation hints. No contradiction with the annotations.

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 and front-loaded: it states the action and target in the first phrase, then immediately gives the behavioral effect and constraints. Every sentence provides necessary information with no fluff or repetition.

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 mutating tool with no output schema, the description covers the essential operational context: what the action does, its visibility effect, permission scope, and the need for a logged-in session. It doesn't mention response behavior, but dry_run and report parameters are adequately described in the schema, and the missing output docs are less critical here.

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 coverage is 67% and the description does not add much parameter-level detail beyond the schema. It echoes the optional report behavior through 'optionally report', but does not clarify the meaning of game, mod_id, or comment_id beyond their names. The missing mod_id and comment_id descriptions are not compensated, though the parameter names are reasonably self-explanatory.

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 and resource: 'Hide a comment on a mod's Posts tab', and clarifies the action is the site's 'Hide and optionally report post' action. It also states the effect ('removes it from view for everyone except staff'), making the purpose concrete and distinct from editing or deleting comments.

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 clearly identifies the intended context: hiding comments on a mod's Posts tabais, and specifies that it is available to the mod's author for any comment on their mod. It also notes the prerequisite of a logged-in web session. It doesn't explicitly name alternatives like edit_mod_comment or delete_mod_comment, but the conditions are clear enough to select this tool.

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