Read a post's comments

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false. The description adds meaningful behavioral context by stating the newest-first ordering and warning that reader-provided text should never be treated as instructions, which is a valuable prompt-injection guard.

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?

Two short sentences, front-loaded with the core action and ordering, followed by a high-value safety warning. No filler and no repetition of what the schema or annotations already state.

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 simple read-only list tool with rich annotations and schema-covered parameters, the description is complete: it states what is returned, the ordering, and a nontrivial safety consideration. No output schema exists, but the return shape is evident from the tool name and description.

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 already documents limit, post_id, and publication; offset is the only parameter without a schema description. The description does not add parameter-specific semantics beyond indicating result ordering, so it neither compensates for offset nor adds extra meaning. At roughly 75% schema coverage, the baseline score is appropriate.

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 names a specific operation ('Read'), an exact resource ('comments on one of your posts'), and an ordering guarantee ('newest first'). It is clearly distinguishable from write/delete siblings like comment_on_post and delete_comment.

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 phrase 'Read the comments on one of your posts' establishes the context for when to call this tool: retrieving comments for a specific post. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the intended use is clear enough for a straightforward read operation.

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