Create a comment

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, indicating a write operation. The description adds valuable behavioral context beyond that: the distinction between immediate publishing (with moderation capability) versus entering the moderation queue, and the permission requirement implied by 'requires moderation capability.' It also conveys that the operation is not idempotent (consistent with idempotentHint=false) by implying a new comment is created each time. This goes beyond the basic mutation signal.

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 two sentences long, front-loaded with the primary purpose ('Post a comment on a content item') followed by the key nuance about status and moderation. Every sentence earns its place; there is no fluff or redundancy. The structure is logical and quickly scannable.

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 create tool with 10 parameters and no output schema, the description covers the core intent, moderation behavior, and a permission requirement. It does not explicitly state what the tool returns (e.g., the new comment ID) or describe error conditions, but such details may be considered implied for a creation operation. The schema covers parameter semantics and prerequisites like comment_status open in the 'post' field description, so the description is sufficient for basic invocation. A slight gap is the lack of return-value clarity, but overall it is adequately 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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so all parameters are documented in the schema. The description adds meaning beyond the schema for the 'status' parameter by explaining the practical effect: setting it to 'approve' publishes immediately, otherwise it enters the moderation queue. This is richer than the schema's 'Moderation status. Requires moderate_comments to set.' For other parameters, the description does not add extra semantics, but the full schema coverage makes that unnecessary. Overall, the description enhances at least one parameter's meaning.

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 tool's action: 'Post a comment on a content item, optionally as a threaded reply.' It specifies the resource (comment on content) and the optional threading behavior, and implicitly distinguishes from siblings like update_comment, delete_comment, and moderate_comments. The status handling adds further specificity.

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 clear context for when to use this tool (to create a new comment on content, optionally threaded) and explains the moderation behavior. It gives a practical condition: setting status to 'approve' requires moderation capability, otherwise the comment enters the normal queue. However, it does not explicitly contrast with sibling tools like update_comment or moderate_comments, relying on the obvious 'create' purpose to imply usage.

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