Private reply (DM) to commenter

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

Annotations indicate destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, which align with sending a DM (a write operation). The description does not elaborate on what destructive means (e.g., does it delete the comment?) or mention permissions or rate limits. With annotations covering the safety profile, the description adds minimal behavioral context.

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, well-structured sentence that front-loads the key action and constraints. Every word is necessary; no redundancy or fluff.

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?

The tool is simple (send DM to comment author), and an output schema exists (not shown but present). The description covers the main constraint (7-day window) but omits prerequisites (e.g., need commentId from another tool) and platform limitation (only Instagram). Given the simplicity, it is adequate but not comprehensive.

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 only 25% (only 'platform' has a description). The description explains the 'commentId' context (Instagram comment, 7-day window) but does not clarify 'user' (possibly the commenter) or 'message' (obvious). It partially compensates but leaves critical gaps, especially for 'user'.

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 action ('send a private DM'), the target ('author of an Instagram comment'), and a key constraint ('within Instagram's 7-day reply window'). This is specific and distinguishes it from siblings like 'public_reply_to_comment' or general 'send_dm'.

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 use for private replies to Instagram comments and mentions a time constraint (7-day window). It provides context but lacks explicit when-not-to-use or alternatives. However, the sibling list includes public_reply_to_comment, making the distinction implicit.

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