Delete Facebook Comment

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=false, so the description's 'Permanent action' adds only slight emphasis. It also explains that page_id is used 'for authentication,' which is useful context not in the schema. However, it does not disclose error handling, reversibility beyond permanence, or any other behavioral traits that annotations do not cover.

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 concise: two sentences followed by a clean argument list. The action and permanence are front-loaded, and every sentence adds value. There is no redundant or irrelevant text, making it easy for an agent to quickly parse.

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 the tool's simplicity (2 params, no output schema) and the safety-related annotations (destructiveHint, not idempotent), the description provides adequate context. It specifies the scope (Facebook Page post), the permanence, and authentication role of page_id. The schema itself adds the prerequisite to call meta_list_pages first. Nothing critical for basic invocation is missing.

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 50% (page_id described, comment_id not). The description compensates by listing both parameters and adding meaning: comment_id as 'the Comment ID to delete' and page_id as 'for authentication,' which clarifies purpose. This goes beyond the bare schema types and provides necessary context for both parameters.

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 states a specific action ('Deletes a comment on a Facebook Page post') with a clear resource and scope. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like meta_delete_post or meta_delete_instagram_comment by explicitly noting Facebook Page comments. The addition of 'Permanent action' reinforces the purpose.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as meta_hide_comment (which hides rather than deletes) or meta_delete_instagram_comment. It does not mention any prerequisites beyond authentication, nor does it suggest when deletion is appropriate. The only usage hint is 'Permanent action,' which warns of consequences but does not direct tool selection.

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