Hide or unhide a comment

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

Annotations cover the safety profile (non-read-only, non-destructive, idempotent), and the description adds genuinely new context: the visibility scope (author still sees the comment) and the two-step confirmation requirement that gates the call. Remaining gaps are error/permission behavior, which is a lesser omission given the annotation coverage.

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 short sentences, the primary effect front-loaded and the reversal case plus confirmation requirement follow immediately. No filler, no restatement of the tool name.

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 a confirmation flow and no output schema, the description supplies the essential effect, reversibility, and the confirmation prerequisite. It stops short of describing failure modes or what the confirmation_token lifecycle looks like on retry, which would complete the picture.

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 50%: only account and confirmation_token are documented in the schema. The description compensates for the undocumented 'hide' boolean by explaining that hide: false reverses the operation, but comment_id and the interaction between confirmation_token and the prior identical call are left to the schema or inference.

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 gives a specific verb ('Hide') and resource ('a comment') and defines the exact effect: hidden from everyone except its author, reversible with hide: false. It does not name the adjacent siblings (delete_comment, toggle_comments) it might be confused with, so it falls short of a 5.

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?

Use is implied by the effect statement and the '(or show it again with hide: false)' parenthetical, which signals the reverse case. However, there is no explicit guidance on choosing this over delete_comment or toggle_comments, and no stated prerequisites beyond the confirmation flow.

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