Get Post Comments

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

Annotations already mark the tool as read-only and non-destructive, and the description is consistent with them. It adds auth context (page_id for authentication, list_pages prerequisite) and clarifies pagination/filter behavior, though it does not cover rate limits or response specifics.

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 purpose sentence is followed by a tight argument list; each parameter line adds necessary guidance including defaults. No redundant prose or filler.

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?

Covers all essential invocation details: required IDs, auth prerequisite, defaults, pagination, and filter choices. Lacks an explicit description of the return payload shape, and there is no output schema, but the tool's read-only nature and strong parameter coverage make that omission minor.

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?

With only 29% schema coverage, the description compensates by explaining post_id format, page_id auth purpose, limit bounds/default, order options, after cursor, and filter semantics. Only response_format is left to the schema, which already documents it.

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 operation—'Gets comments on a Facebook Page post'—and the parameter list names the resource and options. This distinguishes it from Instagram comment tools and post-writing/editing siblings.

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?

Provides a useful prerequisite ('call meta_list_pages first') and clarifies the auth role of page_id, but does not explicitly state when to choose this over alternatives such as meta_get_instagram_comments or meta_reply_post_comment. Usage context is implied rather than explicit.

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