reddit_comments

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It explains error behavior (200 with empty list, 404, 503 retryable) and notes that sort/depth parameters may be ignored. This is good transparency beyond schema, though authentication needs or rate limits are not mentioned.

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 with no fluff. First sentence states purpose, second explains return structure, third covers error codes. Information is front-loaded and every sentence adds value.

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 read-only tool with 4 parameters and no output schema, the description covers purpose, return structure, and error handling. It hints at parameter behavior via schema. It could mention sibling differentiation, but overall it is adequate for an agent to use 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 coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The tool description does not add meaning beyond the schema for parameters; the schema already describes limit's default/clamp and sort/depth's compatibility. The description adds error context but not parameter semantics, so score remains at baseline.

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 starts with 'Get Reddit post comments' which is a specific verb+resource combination. It clearly distinguishes this tool from siblings like reddit_post or reddit_subreddit_comments by focusing on retrieving comments of a specific post. The second sentence clarifies the return structure, reinforcing the purpose.

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 does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives such as reddit_post (which may also return comments) or reddit_subreddit_comments. The purpose is clear enough for an agent to infer, but the lack of explicit differentiation or prerequisites is a moderate gap.

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