reddit_search_posts

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

Even though annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, the description adds concrete behavioral detail: the server cannot post/comment/vote/etc., actions are manual, and competitor-only matches are returned separately. This is useful context beyond the structured annotations, with no contradiction.

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 more verbose than necessary but front-loads the core purpose and each paragraph adds a distinct type of guidance (scope, read-only behavior, participation norms). Some repetition of the annotation is present, but it is still reasonably tight.

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 tool with five parameters and no schema parameter descriptions, the description covers scope and result-category behavior well but leaves input semantics and tool-selection guidance under-specified. The output schema presumably covers return shape, so that gap is not penalized here.

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 explain sort, limit, queries, subreddits, or time_window parameter semantics. It only implies scope and result-category behavior, which is not enough to compensate for the total lack of parameter documentation.

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 opening sentence names a specific action ('Search recent posts') on a specific resource ('subreddits the user has designated as places to contribute'), and the listening_only distinction adds scope. It does not, however, explicitly differentiate this tool from siblings like reddit_find_opportunities 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 gives clear context about when results should be used (contribution subreddits, not listening_only) and mentions excluded subreddit types, but it never states when to prefer this tool over sibling tools or vice versa. Guidance is implied rather than explicit.

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