get_user_comments

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, and the description reinforces this with 'Read-only; works anonymously,' adding behavioral context beyond the structured annotations. It also discloses pagination behavior via the 'after' cursor and describes the returned fields, though it does not go deep into rate limits or edge cases.

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 three sentences with no filler. It front-loads the core purpose, then adds usage boundaries and return-value context, every sentence earning 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?

Despite lacking an output schema, the description lists the key returned fields and explains pagination with the 'after' cursor. It also covers usage context, safety, and operational details, making it complete enough for an agent to invoke the tool correctly without additional tools.

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 the input schema fully documents all five parameters. The description adds a high-level mention of sort and time filtering but does not provide meaningful extra semantics beyond the schema's own detailed parameter descriptions.

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 clearly states it retrieves comments made by a specific user, names the supported sort and time options, and explicitly distinguishes itself from get_user_posts and get_post_comments. The verb, resource, and scope are all immediately identifiable.

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?

Explicit guidance is given: use get_user_posts for submissions, get_user_info for karma/profile stats, and get_post_comments for reading a single post's thread. It also states a clear 'do NOT use' condition, which helps an agent select correctly among many similar sibling tools.

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