Reply to Post Comment

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

Annotations indicate readOnlyHint=false, so the agent knows this is a write operation. The description adds the auth-related context that page_id is used for token lookup, which is helpful beyond the annotations. No contradictions with annotations were found.

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 and front-loaded with the core purpose, followed by a compact Args list. Every line adds useful information with no filler or redundancy.

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?

There is no output schema and the description does not state what the tool returns. It also omits permission requirements and failure modes. For a simple write operation this is acceptable, but the missing return-value information is a notable gap.

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 coverage is only 25%, but the description's Args section provides meaningful explanations for comment_id, page_id, and message, compensating for the lack of schema descriptions. It does not specify exact formats but gives enough semantic context to invoke correctly.

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 verb and resource: 'Replies to a comment on a Facebook Page post.' This clearly identifies the operation and distinguishes it from siblings like meta_reply_instagram_comment, meta_get_post_comments, and meta_send_page_message.

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 context is clear: this tool is for replying to a comment on a Facebook Page post. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, but the scope is specific enough that an agent can infer when to use it.

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