Get Content Comments

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions cursor pagination but omits critical details like read-only nature, authentication requirements, error handling, or any side effects. This is insufficient for a tool with no annotations, earning a 2.

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 sentences, each adding distinct value: the first states the main purpose, the second explains two key behaviors (reply fetching and pagination). No wasted words; front-loaded structure.

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 description covers the key action and pagination but lacks information about return format (no output schema). It implies a list of comments but does not specify structure or fields. Adequate for a simple list tool, but could be more 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 coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description restates commentId and nextToken use but adds no additional meaning beyond the schema descriptions. Therefore, it 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?

The description clearly states 'List comments on a piece of content' with a specific verb and resource. It also mentions fetching replies via commentId. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from siblings like repliz_list_comments or repliz_get_comment, so it scores a 4.

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 the tool: to list comments on a content or fetch replies to a comment. It also explains pagination via nextToken. However, it lacks explicit when-not-to-use guidance or mention of alternatives, so a 4.

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