Kommentare auflisten

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden but only restates the basic function. It doesn't disclose defaults (like status='approve'), pagination, return format, or any edge-case behavior.

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 a single, direct sentence with no unnecessary words. It is well-sized for conveying the core purpose without 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?

Given 7 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is too sparse. It doesn't mention return type, pagination, default filtering, or other operational context, leaving the agent under-informed about expected behavior.

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 the schema fully documents all 7 parameters. The description adds no specific parameter meaning beyond the generic word 'filters', which doesn't compensate beyond 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 the action ('list') and resource ('comments'), and mentions filters. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling comment tools like comment_get or comment_reply, though the name makes the purpose obvious.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It lacks context about use cases, exclusions, or distinguished behavior from other comment-related tools.

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