get_subreddit_info

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden and does well by disclosing an important data quirk: Reddit's anonymous UI no longer shows total members, so 'members' is populated only under a specific sidebar condition. It also clarifies that stats are read from a structured element, giving the agent expectations about data sourcing.

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 compact and front-loaded: the first sentence states what the tool returns, and the second sentence adds a valuable caveat without drifting into unnecessary detail. Every sentence contributes useful information.

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?

Given the low parameter count, presence of an output schema, and no required authentication detail (since it is 'public info'), the description is largely complete for invoking the tool. A slight gap is that it does not mention pagination or criteria for 'top posts,' but this is minor and may be covered by the output schema.

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 100%, so the single 'subreddit' parameter is fully documented with format guidance ('with or without the r/ prefix'). The description itself does not add parameter-level meaning beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline 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 states a specific verb-resource pairing: 'Get public info about a subreddit' and enumerates the contained data: 'description, stats and top posts.' This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools focused on comments, posts, users, or searches.

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 implies usage context by naming the resource and data type, so an agent can infer it is for retrieving subreddit-level public information. However, it does not explicitly contrast with sibling tools or state when not to use it, such as when searching Reddit or fetching specific posts/comments.

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