reply_to_comment

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the full behavioral burden. It discloses that this is a public write action, but does not mention required permissions, rate limits, whether replies are immediately visible, error conditions, or what happens if the comment is deleted or unavailable.

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 a single front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It efficiently conveys the action, visibility, target, and platform context.

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?

The tool is simple with two fully documented required parameters, and the description makes the core action clear. However, because there are no annotations and no output schema, the description leaves behavioral and response expectations underspecified for a write action.

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 100%, so both parameters are already documented in the input schema. The description adds no additional semantics about comment_id format, message constraints, or reply behavior beyond what the schema provides.

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 states a specific action and resource: posting a public reply to a specific comment on an Instagram post or reel. The word 'public' also distinguishes it from the sibling tool send_instagram_private_reply, and the Instagram/media scope distinguishes it from reply_to_threads_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?

Usage is implied by 'public reply' versus private alternatives, but the description does not explicitly say when to choose this over send_instagram_private_reply or other reply/comment tools. It gives enough context to infer the use case but not explicit routing guidance or exclusions.

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