Retrieve comments posted on a MyDramaList custom list by list ID, with optional pagination. Use it to read user discussion and feedback attached to a specific list.
Custom Lists: list comments. params is a JSON object of upstream parameters.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| page | No | ||
| params | No | ||
| list_id | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, openWorldHint=true, destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is clear without the description. The description adds almost nothing beyond that; it does not describe pagination behavior despite a 'page' parameter, nor comment ordering or return shape. With annotations doing the heavy lifting, a low score reflects the lack of added behavioral context.
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 short but not front-loaded with meaningful information. The first clause is a title echo and the second sentence about 'params' is cryptic and poorly integrated. It is under-specified rather than concise, and the structure does not earn 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?
Given no output schema, three parameters at 0% schema coverage, and a read-only list operation, the description is completely inadequate. It fails to explain what comments are returned, how to paginate with 'page', or what 'params' actually accepts. An agent cannot call this tool correctly without guessing.
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 0%, so the description must compensate for undocumented parameters. It only obliquely addresses 'params' ('params is a JSON object of upstream parameters'), which is vague and does not explain what upstream parameters are allowed. The required 'list_id' and optional 'page' parameters get no semantic detail in the description or schema.
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 'Custom Lists: list comments' restates the tool name rather than stating what the tool actually does. It conveys a resource (Custom Lists) and an action (list comments), but the phrasing is essentially a tautology of the name. An agent gains little beyond what 'mdl_custom_lists_list_comments' already implies, and there is no differentiation from siblings like mdl_comments_list or mdl_custom_lists_get_detail.
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?
There is no when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance. The agent must guess if this is for retrieving comments on a specific custom list versus general comments (mdl_comments_list) or other custom-list subresources. No alternatives or exclusions are mentioned.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.