reddit_subreddit_comments

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

With no annotations, the description carries the transparency burden. It does disclose that the tool returns 'flat public comment entries' (data shape) and includes a valuable operational detail about 503 throttling with Retry-After handling. However, it omits other behaviors such as pagination mechanics, result field specifics, or authentication requirements, so it is only partially transparent.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose and followed by a crucial error-handling note. There is no redundant language or filler; 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?

The description covers the tool's purpose, scope (latest-comments feed), and a key error scenario. The schema documents pagination parameters, so not repeating them is fine. Since there is no output schema, a brief mention of what a 'comment entry' includes would improve completeness, but the existing content is comparatively strong for a simple list 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?

The schema descriptions cover 100% of parameters (subreddit, after, limit) with clear meanings. The tool description adds no parameter-specific information beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 uses a specific verb+resource construction: 'List Reddit subreddit comments' and further distinguishes the tool by specifying 'from a subreddit latest-comments feed.' This effectively separates it from sibling tools like reddit_subreddit_posts or reddit_user_comments. It is not a tautology and clearly communicates the tool's scope.

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 provides clear context that this tool retrieves a subreddit's latest comments feed, which is enough to infer when to use it (when you need recent public comments from a subreddit). It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the context is unambiguous. A slight deduction for not mentioning related tools like reddit_comments or reddit_user_comments.

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