list_post_comments

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It only restates the core operation and adds no information about pagination, ordering, or whether only top-level comments are returned. The term 'Liste' implies a read-only operation by convention, but no explicit behavioral traits are disclosed.

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 short French sentence with no fluff. It is front-loaded and every word contributes to the meaning, making it optimally concise for a tool of this complexity.

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 tool is simple and an output schema exists, but the description lacks guidance on pagination/limit behavior and does not explicitly contrast with list_ig_comments. It is adequate for a basic call, but an agent would benefit from knowing whether the limit is optional or how many comments are returned by default.

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 0%, and the description does not compensate by explaining either paramener. While 'post_id' and 'limit' are self-evident, the description never clarifies that 'limit' defaults to 50 or how it affects the result. The description adds no meaning beyond the param names.

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 states a clear verb ('Liste') and resource ('les commentaires d'une publication Facebook'), explicitly naming Facebook to differentiate from the Instagram sibling. The tool name and description together unambiguously identify the action and target.

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 clearly specifies the context: Facebook post comments. It does not explicitly name an alternative or exclusionary condition, but the Facebook-scoping is enough to guide an agent away from the Instagram comment tool. A true 5 would mention 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.