mdl_comments_post

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, openWorldHint=true, idempotentHint=false. The description adds meaningful context beyond that: it requires host-configured authentication and warns that it changes MyDramaList data and should be reserved for explicit user requests.

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, front-loaded sentences with no filler; the auth and caution notes appear early. The leading "Comments: post." fragment is redundant with the tool name/title and slightly wastes space.

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?

For a mutation tool with no output schema and 5 parameters (3 required), the description covers auth, the change warning, and one key parameter, but omits meaning for `pid`, `spoiler`, and `reply_to` and says nothing about the response. Adequate but with clear gaps.

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 0%, so the description must carry the load. It clarifies only `ptype` ("upstream content type, clist for lists"), leaving `pid`, `spoiler`, and `reply_to` undocumented; `message` is self-evident. Partial compensation for a genuine gap.

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 and resource ("Publishes a comment") and clarifies the tricky `ptype` concept as the upstream content type. An agent can immediately distinguish this write tool from siblings like mdl_comments_list, mdl_comments_update, and mdl_comments_delete.

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?

Gives explicit usage restraint ("use only for an explicit user request") and notes the clist special case for lists. It stops short of naming the sibling alternative (e.g., mdl_custom_lists_post_comment) for list comments, so it falls just below a full guidance score.

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