Get comment

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered externally. The description adds only the word 'scheduled' (implying scope to comments on scheduled posts) and says nothing about behavior on a missing/unknown commentId or auth requirements.

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?

A single short sentence with the resource front-loaded and zero filler. It is efficient, though so terse that it borders on under-specification rather than wasteful phrasing.

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 lookup tool with one undocumented parameter and no output schema, the description omits what is returned (comment fields, author, status) and where the commentId comes from. An agent can guess, but nothing needed for reliable invocation is supplied.

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% — commentId is typed only as a bare string with no format, source, or example. The description never mentions the parameter, so it does not compensate for the documentation gap as required at low 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?

States a specific verb (Fetch) and resource (one scheduled comment), which distinguishes it from list_comments and create/update_comment by name alone. It stops short of explicitly naming a sibling or scoping the distinction, so not a 5.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this instead of list_comments, get_post, or the comment-mutating siblings. The agent must infer that a commentId must already be known and come from a list operation.

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