reddit_find_opportunities

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

The description goes well beyond the annotations by explicitly stating the server cannot post, comment, vote, edit, delete, follow, or message, and that no such code exists. It also discloses that high-promotion-risk threads are removed entirely, describes result contents, and surfaces the real-device-check flag.

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 and structured in clear paragraphs. The final paragraph is somewhat redundant with the opening, restating helpfulness and promotion concerns, but overall the length is justified for the complexity.

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?

The description thoroughly covers safety, ranking behavior, filtering, and output content, and an output schema exists to document return values. The main gap is parameter semantics, which is not compensated for anywhere.

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%, and the description does not mention days, topics, subreddits, or max_results. An agent must rely entirely on parameter names and defaults; the description adds no meaning about how these parameters shape the ranking or filtering behavior.

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 first sentence states a specific action (rank recent threads) on a specific resource (Reddit threads) with a clear criterion: how genuinely useful the user could be in them. It adds unique ranking logic around helpfulness and promotion risk, which distinguishes it from sibling tools like reddit_search_posts or reddit_daily_digest.

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 implies the use case through its purpose statement, but it never explicitly says when to prefer this tool over siblings such as reddit_daily_digest or reddit_search_posts. The normative instructions about prioritizing helpful participation are behavioral guidance, not usage routing.

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