reddit_get_pool

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

With no annotations, the description takes on the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It discloses that results are sorted most-relevant first, that the pool is brand-level and scored, and that no content is needed. It also clarifies the tool is not a scheduled publishing medium. However, it does not mention potential side effects (though 'Returns' implies read-only), authentication requirements, or what happens if no pool exists.

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 front-loaded with the primary purpose. Each sentence earns its place: purpose, use case, alternative tool distinction, and workflow context. It is dense but well-structured with parentheticals and clear emphasis.

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 simple tool with no output schema, the description covers the core aspects: what it returns, how to use it, how to limit results, and how it fits into the Reddit workflow. It could benefit from slightly more detail about the output shape (e.g., fields returned per subreddit), but the mention of 'each scored' gives useful context. Overall, it is complete for its complexity.

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 schema already documents both parameters (top and brandId) with their meanings. The description adds some value by mentioning 'pass top for a top-N list' and 'results are sorted most-relevant first', but this largely mirrors the schema. No additional syntax or format details are provided 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 'Returns the brand's pool of relevant subreddits' with a specific verb and resource, and explicitly identifies it as the brand-level subreddit match with scores. It also distinguishes itself from the sibling tool reddit_suggest, which is described as a 'different, content-specific step.'

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 explicitly states when to use this tool ('which/what/top N subreddits should my brand post in?') and when not to, noting that 'NO content needed' and that reddit_suggest is for content-specific steps. It also provides high-level workflow context that Reddit is a repurpose-to-Reddit workflow, not a scheduled publishing medium.

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