Comment on company post as admin

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

The description goes beyond the readOnlyHint=false and openWorldHint=true annotations by revealing the identity selector flip behavior and the default of comment_as_company. This is valuable, but it doesn't disclose whether the identity flip persists after the call or other potential side effects.

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 extremely concise: two sentences that front-load the core action and then explain the key conditional behavior. No filler or redundant information.

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 relatively simple, and the description covers the main action and the identity switch. With an output schema present, return values need no explanation. Minor gaps like admin prerequisites are not stated, but the name and sibling context make them inferable.

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 descriptions are 100% covered, but the description adds critical meaning for comment_as_company by explaining the default and its consequences. It also clarifies that company_id is used to locate the identity selector, augmenting the schema's own description.

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 comment on a company post' and specifies the optional identity behavior. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like company_reply_comment (which replies to existing comments) and personal_tag_company (which tags a company).

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 by describing what the tool does, but it doesn't explicitly state when to use it over alternatives or exclude other comment-related tools. There is no mention of prerequisites like admin rights or when to choose comment_as_company=False.

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