list_comments

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states that the tool lists comments for a post, without mentioning read-only status, response format, pagination, error handling, or permissions. This adds little beyond the tool name and schema.

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 a single, concise sentence—'List comments for a specific post'—with no redundant words. It is front-loaded with the action and resource, and every word contributes meaning.

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?

The tool is simple, with one fully documented parameter and no output schema. The description states the core purpose, but it does not explain the return value or any limitations, such as ordering or maximum results. It is minimally viable but leaves the agent without a complete picture of the tool's behavior.

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?

The schema already provides a complete description for the single parameter 'number' ('The post number to get comments for'), achieving 100% schema coverage. The description does not add any meaningful semantic detail beyond what the schema already states, so the 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 'List comments for a specific post' clearly identifies the verb (List), the resource (comments), and the scope (specific post). It effectively distinguishes this tool from siblings like add_comment, delete_comment, and list_posts, which involve different actions or resources.

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 implies its usage—when you need comments for a particular post—but it does not explicitly state alternatives or exclusions. There is no mention of when to prefer this tool over related tools like get_post or respond_to_post, leaving the usage context somewhat implicit.

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