reddit_post_transcript_getGet captions transcript for a Reddit video post. Accepts a post or video URL.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| url | Yes | Link to the Reddit post or hosted video. | |
| language | No | Optional ISO 639-1 language code (two letters) to prefer when multiple caption tracks exist. |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, covering the safety profile. The description adds that it accepts both post and video URLs, which is useful behavioral detail. However, it does not disclose behaviors like returning null when no captions exist or any rate limiting. With annotations carrying the primary safety context, this is acceptable but not rich.
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 two sentences with no wasted words. The primary verb and resource are front-loaded ('Get captions transcript'), and the URL flexibility is stated succinctly. This is exemplary conciseness.
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?
For a simple tool with two parameters, no output schema, and annotations covering read-only behavior, the description is nearly complete. It explains the purpose and the accepted input format. The only minor gap is not explicitly stating that the return value is the transcript text, but this is strongly implied by the name and description.
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 100%, and both parameters (url and language) are described in the schema. The description adds marginal value by noting the URL can be a post or video link, which slightly extends the schema's description. Since the schema already explains the language parameter, the description does not meaningfully improve parameter understanding.
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's function: retrieving the captions transcript for a Reddit video post. It distinguishes itself from related Reddit tools like reddit_post_get (which likely returns post metadata) and reddit_post_comments_list (comments) by focusing on captions. The added detail that it accepts both post and video URLs further clarifies scope.
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 provides context that this is for video posts and accepts post or video URLs, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives, nor does it mention exclusions (e.g., non-video posts). While an agent can infer usage, there is no direct guidance about when to choose this over reddit_post_get or other transcript tools.
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 is clearly scoped to a specific platform and action (e.g., facebook_post_get vs instagram_post_get). Descriptions explicitly differentiate similar tools across platforms, and within-a-platform tools like tiktok_search_videos_list vs tiktok_search_hashtag_list have clear disambiguation notes.
All 167 tools follow a strict `platform_resource_action` pattern (e.g., youtube_video_comments_list). No mixing of styles—snake_case throughout, with consistent verb ordering (get, list, search, etc.).
The server has 167 tools, which is far beyond the typical well-scoped range of 3-15. While the broad multi-platform scope justifies many tools, this extreme number makes the tool surface overwhelming and difficult for an agent to navigate efficiently.
The tool set covers a wide range of platforms and operations including profile retrieval, post/video fetching, comments, search, transcripts, and ad library access. Minor gaps exist (e.g., no Facebook events or LinkedIn messaging), but the surface is comprehensive for a read-only data aggregation use case.