reddit_get_evidence

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

Discloses important behavioral details: returns one dict per known id in order requested, includes permalink and trimmed quote, skips unknown ids. This conveys read-only behavior even without annotations, though no explicit safety or rate-limit info.

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: first for action, second for return structure, third for usage guidance. No unnecessary words, nicely front-loaded with the core purpose.

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?

Adequately covers the tool's behavior and return format, especially given the presence of an output schema for structural details. Lacks mention of error cases or prerequisites but is sufficient for a retrieval tool.

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%, but the description only says 'for the given ids' without explaining the format, origin, or constraints of the ids. Adds minimal value beyond the schema's type definition.

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?

Clearly states it resolves stored items into evidence. Specifies return type (EvidenceItem), content (permalink, verbatim quote), and that it helps ground claims. However, 'stored items' is vague without context of other tools, and it doesn't explicitly differentiate from siblings.

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 advises using the tool to ground claims with real Reddit links instead of paraphrasing, providing clear when-to-use context. However, it does not mention when not to use or suggest alternatives among sibling tools.

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