hide_comment

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It mentions the public visibility effect but omits critical details: whether this requires specific permissions, if it's reversible (though implied by 'unhide'), rate limits, or what happens when applied to already hidden/visible comments. The description is insufficient for a mutation tool with zero 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?

The description is perfectly concise with two sentences that each add value: the first states the action and resource, the second explains the consequence. There's no wasted language or redundancy.

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 no annotations and no output schema, the description is minimally adequate. It covers the basic purpose and effect but lacks details on permissions, error conditions, return values, or integration with sibling tools. The high schema coverage helps, but behavioral gaps remain significant.

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 both parameters. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what's in the schema (e.g., no examples, format details, or edge cases). This meets the baseline for high schema coverage.

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 specific action ('hide or unhide'), the resource ('a comment on your Instagram post'), and the effect ('hidden comments are not visible to the public'). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like 'delete_comment' by specifying a reversible visibility change rather than permanent removal.

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 implies usage for managing comment visibility on Instagram posts, but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'delete_comment' or 'reply_to_comment'. It also doesn't mention prerequisites such as authentication or ownership requirements.

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