profile_comments_list

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the description's read only nature is clear. The description adds value by noting that items may include nested replies and that reviews sync from Google twice daily, providing useful behavioral context beyond the annotations.

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 with no repetition or fluff. The first sentence states the core purpose, and the second adds important behavioral context. Every word earns its place.

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 and the presence of annotations and full schema descriptions, the description is fairly complete. It mentions nested replies and sync schedule, which are important. However, it could have mentioned default ordering or pagination behavior beyond the schema, but overall it is sufficient.

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 100%, so the schema already documents all parameters. The description does not add new information about the parameters beyond what is in the schema descriptions. It provides context about the profile_id needing to be a google_business profile, but that is already in the schema description. Thus, baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 tool lists profile-scoped comments, specifically Google Business reviews. It distinguishes from the sibling tool comments_list by explaining that reviews live on a location and cannot be reached via comments_list, making the purpose unambiguous.

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 explicitly says when to use this tool (for Google Business reviews) and when not to (cannot be reached via comments_list). It also provides context about the sync schedule (twice daily at 06:00 and 18:00 UTC), which helps set expectations about data freshness.

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