get_comments

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It states the output includes nested comments, likes, author, and time, but does not mention any side effects, limitations, or error handling. There is no mention of potential rate limits or partial results, leaving ambiguity about the tool's behavior.

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, concise sentence that efficiently conveys the tool's purpose and output contents without unnecessary detail. It is well-structured and easy to understand.

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 description provides some context by listing the included data (nested comments, likes, author, time), but it does not clarify the impact of the 'max' parameter on the 'complete tree' claim, nor does it explain the output structure or error behavior. This leaves some gaps in understanding the tool's full context.

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?

The schema provides descriptions for all three parameters, but the tool description itself does not add meaning. It claims to return a 'complete comment tree', yet the 'max' parameter limits the number of root comments, creating a potential contradiction and leaving parameter behavior unclear beyond the 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?

The description clearly states the tool's function: it retrieves the complete comment tree under any Zhihu content, including nested sub-comments, like counts, author, and time. This uses a specific verb '获取' and specifies the resource and scope, making the purpose unambiguous.

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as search_questions or search_articles. It only describes what it does without indicating appropriate use cases or when not to use it.

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