post_comment

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the required permission ('instagram_manage_comments permission'), which is a key behavioral trait for authorization. However, it lacks details on rate limits, error handling, or what happens on success (e.g., comment ID returned), leaving gaps in behavioral context.

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 two sentences with zero waste: the first sentence states the purpose and scope, and the second adds critical permission information. It is front-loaded and appropriately sized for the tool's 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?

Given no annotations and no output schema, the description is incomplete for a mutation tool. It covers the purpose and permission requirement but lacks details on return values, error cases, or side effects, which are important for an agent to use it correctly in 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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents both parameters ('media_id' and 'message') with details like max length. The description does not add any additional semantic meaning beyond what the schema provides, such as examples or usage notes, meeting the baseline for high 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 action ('Post a top-level comment') and resource ('on an Instagram post'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like 'reply_to_comment' (which is for replies) and 'delete_comment' (which removes comments). It specifies the scope ('top-level') to differentiate from nested comments.

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 explicitly states when to use it ('post a top-level comment') and includes a prerequisite ('Requires instagram_manage_comments permission'), but does not mention when not to use it or name specific alternatives like 'reply_to_comment' for replies, leaving some guidance implicit.

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