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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description adds performance details (8-16 seconds, 8-26 KB) and pagination behavior via the after token, which is useful context beyond the structured annotations. It does not contradict annotations.

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 well-structured: purpose first, then return fields, then sort/timeframe, then performance, then alternatives. It is concise without redundancy, each sentence adds value, and it is front-loaded with the core action.

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 (5 params, 2 enums, output schema exists), the description covers the essential aspects: what it does, key fields, sort options, pagination, performance, and when to use alternatives. It is comprehensive for an agent to decide whether and how to invoke it 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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so all five parameters are already documented. The description adds minimal extra semantics: it reiterates sort options and mentions the after token for pagination, but these are also in the schema. It does not introduce new parameter meaning beyond what the schema provides.

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 searches every public subreddit for posts, returning posts and a pagination token. It explicitly distinguishes itself from get_reddit_subreddit_search (single community) and get_reddit_post_comments (post discussion), making the purpose unambiguous.

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 explicitly names alternatives and the conditions to choose them: 'To stay inside one community use get_reddit_subreddit_search...' and 'to read one post's discussion use get_reddit_post_comments.' It also notes performance characteristics (slowest endpoint) to inform usage decisions.

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