get_comments

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

With no annotations, the description needs to carry behavioral disclosure. It says 'retrieve', which implies read-only, but does not explicitly state side effects, return format, or behavior when parameters are combined. The addition of 'from JSONPlaceholder' provides source context, but it's minimal.

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, focused sentence that front-loads the purpose and then lists the retrieval variants. Every word earns its place with no redundancy.

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 the tool's simplicity (no required params, no output schema, no annotations), the description covers the core functionality and parameter combinations. It misses ambiguity about providing both id and postId, but that's a minor gap for a simple GET tool.

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?

The schema only says parameters are optional, but the description explains the meaning: no params returns all, id returns a specific comment, postId returns comments for a post. This adds semantic value beyond the schema, which has 100% coverage but lacks the combination logic.

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 gets comments from JSONPlaceholder, with a specific verb and resource. It also distinguishes between retrieving all comments, by ID, or by post ID, which separates it from sibling tools that retrieve other resources.

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?

While it doesn't explicitly say 'use this instead of get_posts', the resource is clearly distinct from siblings, and the description outlines the three usage modes (all, by ID, by post ID). It implies the appropriate context for using this tool.

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