Skip to main content
Glama
Crawlora-org

Crawlora MCP

Official
by Crawlora-org
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Remote

reddit_post

Fetch a public Reddit post by ID; optionally include engagement metrics like net score, upvote ratio, and comment count for deeper analysis.

Instructions

Get Reddit post. Returns a public Reddit post. The default mode is 1 credit. Set include_metrics=true to return public net score, upvote ratio, comment count, award count, and estimated upvote/downvote totals for 3 credits. Reddit fuzzes voting data, so estimates are approximate; share, repost/crosspost, and view counts are not exposed anonymously. If source.type is redlib, public fields and credit weights are preserved.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesReddit post id or t3_ id
include_metricsNoInclude public engagement metrics; costs 3 credits instead of 1

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / include_metrics
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Include public engagement metrics; costs 3 credits instead of 1",
+  "type": "boolean"
+}
  2. Changed1 schema field changedv1.5.0
    • removedInput schema / properties / with_scores
      Removed value: -{
-  "description": "When true, source score, upvote_ratio, and comment_count from old.reddit HTML rather than the default (slower)",
-  "type": "boolean"
-}
  3. Changed1 schema field changedv1.2.0
    • addedInput schema / properties / with_scores
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "When true, source score, upvote_ratio, and comment_count from old.reddit HTML rather than the default (slower)",
+  "type": "boolean"
+}
  4. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and largely succeeds: it discloses credit weight (1 vs 3), what the expanded metrics actually contain, and candid data limitations (Reddit fuzzes voting data, estimates approximate, share/repost/view counts unavailable anonymously, redlib source behavior). This is substantial behavioral context beyond what any structured field provides.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Front-loads the purpose, then credit cost, then caveats and the redlib edge case. Each sentence contributes, though the closing redlib sentence is somewhat niche and would matter to few callers.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a two-parameter read tool with no annotations or output schema, the description covers return content, credit cost, and data caveats well. The only meaningful gap is that it does not clarify the accepted id format beyond the schema's own note, but overall it is complete enough to call correctly.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description goes beyond the schema by enumerating exactly which metrics `include_metrics=true` returns (net score, upvote ratio, comment count, award count, upvote/downvote estimates) rather than only 'public engagement metrics', adding real semantic value.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb and resource ('Get Reddit post', 'Returns a public Reddit post'), making it clear this fetches a single post by id. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from siblings like reddit_comments or reddit_user_posts, but the singular 'post' resource is unambiguous.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description explains the cost tradeoff of the `include_metrics` option (1 vs 3 credits), which is useful invocation guidance. However, it gives no when-to-use/when-not guidance relative to alternatives such as reddit_search or reddit_subreddit_posts, nor does it say an id is required or where to obtain one.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools