auto_comment_by_keyword

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

Despite no annotations, the description fully discloses behavioral traits: rate limits (5/day, 1/hour), author requirement (1st-degree network), spam phrase blocking, personalized draft requirement, and ban risk. Also mentions safety gate.

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?

Two sentences covering all critical information: action, risk, limits, prerequisites, and a clear directive (dry_run). No wasted words, front-loaded with key details.

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?

Provides good behavioral and usage context but lacks parameter explanations. For a high-risk automated tool, parameter semantics are essential for safe invocation. Output schema absent, but description doesn't cover that.

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%. The description does not explain the purpose or meaning of the keyword, max_results, or tone parameters beyond the schema's default values and enum. Users must infer usage.

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?

Clearly states the action ('Search posts by keyword and comment on them') and resource (posts), distinguishing from sibling tools like auto_like_by_keyword and comment_on_post.

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?

Provides explicit usage warnings: high ban risk, rate limits, network requirement, spam blocking, and the strong recommendation to start with dry_run=true. Does not explicitly list alternatives but clearly indicates when to use cautiously.

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