get_searchSearch Group: Explore. Billing per call: 1 Credits.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| q | No | ||
| t | No | ||
| show | No | ||
| sort | No | ||
| type | No | ||
| after | No | ||
| count | No | ||
| limit | No | ||
| before | No | ||
| category | No | ||
| sr_detail | No | ||
| restrict_sr | No | ||
| include_facets | No |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavior. It only mentions billing per call, which is a cost rather than behavioral trait. There is no information about side effects, required authentication, or what results are returned.
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 short, which is concise, but it is under-specified rather than well-structured. The phrase 'Search Group: Explore' is more of a category label than a meaningful description, and the billing note is peripheral. The brevity does not earn its place because it conveys almost no useful information.
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 complexity (13 parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description is grossly inadequate. It does not explain the expected input, output, or any operational context, making it nearly impossible for an agent to use correctly.
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?
With 13 parameters and 0% schema description coverage, the description must compensate, but it adds zero parameter information. The parameters like 'q', 't', 'show', 'sort' remain entirely undefined, offering no semantic value beyond their names.
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 'Search Group: Explore' is a tautology that merely restates the tool's name and title without specifying what is being searched or the scope. It fails to distinguish from sibling tools like get_subreddit_search or get_user_search, providing no verb+resource clarity.
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?
There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus the many sibling search tools. The description offers no context about intended use cases, filters, or limitations, leaving the agent without actionable direction.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Each tool targets a distinct resource and action combination (e.g., get_hot vs get_subreddit_hot vs get_user_posts). The scope is clearly delineated by prefixes like 'get_subreddit' and 'get_user', making it easy for an agent to pick the right tool.
All tools follow the consistent 'get_<resource>_<modifier>' pattern using snake_case. Even get_by_id fits the general get_ prefix style. The naming is uniform and predictable across 31 tools.
With 31 tools, the count exceeds the 25+ threshold considered too many. While Reddit has many read endpoints, this server covers only GET operations and still feels bloated, especially with multiple near-duplicate sort variants. It could be consolidated.
The tool surface is entirely read-only (only get_* operations). For a Reddit integration, obvious write operations like posting, commenting, voting, and moderation actions are missing. This creates significant gaps for many use cases and limits the server to exploration only.