reddit_mentions_by_ticker

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

No annotations are provided, and the description does not disclose any behavioral traits such as side effects, authentication requirements, rate limits, or data latency. The only information is the return format, which is insufficient for a tool with no annotations.

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 includes a verbose JSON example block that repeats schema information (format field) and adds output structure, but lacks conciseness. It is front-loaded with a clear purpose sentence, but the example could be more succinct or better formatted.

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 no annotations, no output schema, and a nested input schema, the description should explain required parameters, defaults, and the 'req' wrapper. It only shows an example return format without clarifying the input structure or behavior, leaving significant gaps for an agent.

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 input schema has 5 parameters wrapped in a nested 'req' object, but the description does not explain any of them. The JSON example in the description shows output fields, not input. Schema description coverage is 0%, and the description adds minimal value beyond the schema.

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 provides 'Reddit mention counts across subreddits for a single ticker', specifying the verb (counts) and resource (mentions). However, it does not distinguish this tool from the sibling 'screener_reddit_mentions', which likely aggregates across tickers.

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?

No guidance is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., screener_reddit_mentions) or when not to use it. The description lacks any contextual usage advice.

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