getComments

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses pagination via nextPageToken and sorting options, but does not mention whether top-level comments only are returned, response structure, or rate limits. Some behavioral context is provided, but gaps remain.

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 with no fluff. It front-loads the main purpose, then adds key features (sorting) and a usage note (pagination). Every sentence earns its place.

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?

No output schema exists, so the description should explain return values. It mentions nextPageToken but does not describe the comment list structure or clarify scope (top-level vs all comments). The description is adequate but leaves some gaps for an agent relying solely on it.

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 covers all parameters with descriptions, so the baseline is 3. The description repeats pagination and sorting but adds no new meaning beyond the schema, which already provides detailed parameter descriptions.

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 fetches YouTube video comments with pagination, using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from siblings like getTranscript (transcripts) and getCommentReplies (replies) by focusing on comments and pagination.

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 implies usage for retrieving video comments but does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions (e.g., 'for replies, use getCommentReplies'). Context is present but no direct comparison to sibling tools, so it remains at an implied level.

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