List comments

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

Annotations only say read-only/idempotent; the description adds substantive behavior the annotations cannot convey: the whole thread is returned at once with no pagination, ordering is oldest-first, replies are nested under parents, and deleted comments are omitted. That is exactly the context an agent needs before calling.

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?

Three tight sentences, front-loaded with the resource and its fields, then return shape, then the sibling handoff. No filler and nothing repeated from the schema.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description carries the return-shape burden and does so fully: field set, nesting, ordering, exclusion of deleted items, and the meaning of the replied flag. Nothing an agent needs in order to call this correctly is missing.

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 would be 3, but the description adds real meaning: replied means answered anywhere in the thread under the comment, and unanswered_only applies to top-level comments only — nuances not present in the schema's "Skip threads you already replied to".

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?

States a specific verb+resource ("Comments on a post") and enumerates the returned fields (author, text, replied). It also names the follow-on sibling ("Pass comment_id to reply_to_comment"), so an agent can separate this from reply_to_comment and get_post without opening a schema.

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?

It gives a clear use context (fetch all comments of one post) and an explicit sibling handoff to reply_to_comment, plus the condition that selects unanswered_only. It stops short of naming when to prefer an alternative listing tool (e.g. get_conversation or list_note_replies), so no explicit exclusion.

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