moltbook_upvote_comment

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden but lacks behavioral details. It mentions 'toggle off a previous upvote' with 'force', hinting at mutation, but doesn't disclose permissions, side effects, rate limits, or what 'Vote result' entails. The description is minimal and misses key operational context.

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 front-loaded with the core purpose, followed by structured 'Args' and 'Returns' sections. It's efficient with minimal waste, though the 'Returns' section is vague ('Vote result'). Overall, it's well-structured and appropriately sized.

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 no annotations, 0% schema coverage, and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It covers basic purpose and parameters but lacks details on authentication, error handling, return format, and interaction with sibling tools. For a mutation tool with two parameters, this leaves significant gaps.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description compensates by explaining both parameters: 'comment_id' as 'The comment UUID to upvote' and 'force' as 'Set True to intentionally toggle off a previous upvote'. This adds crucial meaning beyond the bare schema, clarifying the toggle behavior for 'force'.

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 action ('Upvote') and resource ('a comment'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like 'moltbook_upvote_post' which targets posts instead of comments. However, it doesn't specify what 'upvote' means in this context (e.g., incrementing a score, adding a like).

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives is provided. The description doesn't mention prerequisites (e.g., authentication), differentiate from 'moltbook_downvote_post', or explain scenarios for using 'force'. Usage is implied but not articulated.

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