reddit_search

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, and idempotentHint, covering the tool's safety and idempotency profile. The description adds the return field list (title, subreddit, score, comment count, URL, snippet), which is useful behavioral context beyond annotations. However, it does not disclose rate limits, pagination, or any potential side effects, and since annotations already cover the main behavioral traits, the description adds only marginal value.

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 concise and well-structured. It leads with the primary purpose in the first sentence, then lists the return fields in the second. Every sentence adds value, and there is no redundant information. It is appropriately short for a search tool with a clear function.

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 5 parameters and an output schema, the description is minimal. It does not explain when to use it, how to construct effective queries, or how parameters interact. While the output schema likely describes return fields, the description lacks guidance on parameter usage and alternative selection. The tool's openWorldHint suggests external data, but the description does not elaborate on limitations or expectations. Overall, it is not complete enough for an agent to use confidently without additional schema inspection.

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 only 20% (only 'subreddit' has a description in the schema). The tool description does not explain any parameter meanings, such as what 'query' represents, how 'sort' affects results, or what 'time' filtering does. Since coverage is low, the description should compensate, but it provides zero parameter guidance. An agent would have to rely on the schema's enum values and default values without understanding the semantics.

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 clearly states the tool's purpose: searching Reddit threads to understand buyer language. It specifies the resource (Reddit threads) and the intent (hear how real buyers phrase questions). It also lists the returned fields, which clarifies the output. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools, though the siblings are obviously different in scope, so it's not a major issue.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus the many sibling tools. It does not mention alternative tools or conditions for selection. An agent is left to infer usage from the name and description alone, with no explicit context about when Reddit search is the right choice over suggest, trends, or expand tools.

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