get_v2_media_comments

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

Description mentions a return limit of 15 comments per request, implying pagination, but lacks details on authentication, rate limits, or behavior when no comments exist. Annotations are absent, so the description carries full burden and falls short.

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?

Two sentences; the first includes the API endpoint path which is redundant and could be removed. The structure is acceptable but not optimally concise for an AI agent.

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?

No output schema, incomplete parameter descriptions, and missing behavioral details. The tool is moderate complexity (3 params, 1 required) but the description does not sufficiently guide an agent on proper invocation.

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?

Input schema has 3 parameters with 0% description coverage. The tool description adds no explanation for any parameter (id, can_support_threading, page_id), leaving their purpose and valid values entirely unclear.

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 retrieves media comments and specifies a return limit of 15 comments. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like get_v1_media_comments_chunk or get_v2_media_comments_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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., get_v1_media_comments_chunk for chunked access, get_v2_media_comments_replies for replies). No context about prerequisites or exclusions.

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