Hide/Unhide Thread Reply

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

Annotations already declare readOnly=false, destructive=false, and idempotent=true, so an agent knows this is a safe, reversible mutation. The description adds the key toggling behavior (hide vs unhide) but provides no further context about permissions, side effects, or response format. This is adequate for a simple toggle but not rich.

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 action, followed by a compact argument list. Every sentence earns its place and there is no redundant 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?

For a two-parameter idempotent toggle, the definition covers the operation and argument semantics clearly, and annotations handle the safety profile. Missing return-value details and permission notes are minor gaps given the low complexity.

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 50% because reply_id has no schema-level description. The description fills this gap by defining reply_id as 'Reply media ID' and restating the hide boolean semantics. It could go further by explaining how to find the reply_id, but the provided mapping is sufficient for correct invocation.

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 uses a specific verb ('Hides or unhides') and a clear target resource ('a reply on a Threads post'), making the tool's purpose immediately obvious. It also distinguishes itself from sibling tools like meta_hide_comment and meta_hide_instagram_comment by scoping to Threads replies.

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 usage is implied: this is the tool to call when the agent wants to change the visibility state of a Threads reply. However, the description does not explicitly state when to use this over alternatives, nor does it mention any preconditions like requiring the reply to belong to the authenticated user's post.

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