Hide or unhide a comment

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

Goes well beyond the annotations by disclosing that the action is reversible, that it is not a deletion, that the server has no delete capability at all, and that hide support is network-dependent. The only friction is the mild tension with destructiveHint=true, which an agent may read as an irreversible state change; the description never reconciles that flag with its 'reversible, not a deletion' claim.

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?

Three sentences, no filler, front-loaded with the action, then the reversibility guarantee, then the prerequisite. Each sentence changes what the agent should do.

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?

An output schema exists and annotations cover the safety profile, so the description only needed to fill behavioral gaps — which it does by covering reversibility, network support limits, and the capability pre-check. Nothing needed to call this correctly is missing.

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 75% and the schema itself already explains hidden, social_network and id_organization in detail, including the cost/latency tradeoff of omitting social_network. The description adds no parameter-level information beyond that, so the schema does the heavy lifting and the baseline of 3 applies.

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?

States a concrete verb (hide/unhide), the exact resource (a comment), and the scope (its visibility on the public timeline). It also pre-empts confusion with a tool that would delete the comment, so an agent can tell immediately this is not a removal operation.

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?

Explicitly routes the agent: it names the prerequisite tool (get_social_capabilities to check first) and gives a concrete when-not case (LinkedIn has no hide at all). This is a complete use/do-not-use instruction rather than an implied one.

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