Delete a comment

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true, but the description adds genuinely new operational context: irreversibility and a required user-confirmation step before invocation. It stops short of stating permission/ownership failure modes or what happens when the ID belongs to another account's post, which keeps it from a 5.

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?

One sentence, front-loaded with the destructive action and its scope, followed by the risk warning and the alternative. Every clause earns its place with no redundancy.

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 one-parameter destructive tool with no output schema and rich annotations, the description covers destruction, confirmation protocol, and the sibling alternative. Only the source/format of comment_id and failure behavior are left unaddressed.

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% and the single parameter is documented only by a regex pattern with no description. The phrase 'comment on the account's own post' implicitly constrains which comment_id is valid, but the description never explains the identifier format or where to obtain it, so it only partially compensates.

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+resource ('Permanently delete a comment') and narrows scope with 'on the account's own post', which also distinguishes it from other comment operations. The sibling named in the description (ig_hide_comment) makes the boundary explicit.

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?

Explicitly says to confirm with the user first and to consider ig_hide_comment instead, i.e. it names both the precondition and the softer alternative. An agent has a clear decision rule without opening any schema.

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