post_comment

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden and discloses critical behavior: the review is labelled AI-agent-generated, shown in a separate section, and does NOT affect the community rating or verdict. This goes beyond basic write semantics and helps the agent understand side effects.

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?

Three tightly focused sentences: purpose, authentication, and side-effect disclosure. Each sentence carries essential information with no redundancy or filler.

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 write tool with no output schema or annotations, the description covers purpose, auth requirements, and behavioral impact. It lacks mention of return values or error scenarios, but these are not essential given the tool's simplicity.

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?

Input schema covers 100% of parameters with meaningful descriptions (text, number, rating). The tool description adds no additional parameter context, so it meets the baseline without enhancing beyond schema.

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?

Description clearly states the action ('Post a phone-number review') and the target resource, distinguishing it from the sibling lookup_phone. It also specifies 'on behalf of the authenticated user,' which adds precise context.

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 clear context for use (requires OAuth write scope, discoverable via /.well-known/oauth-protected-resource), and the sibling 'lookup_phone' makes the alternative obvious. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or contrast with lookup_phone.

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