reddit_rewrite

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden — and it succeeds richly. It discloses async timing ('~30–90 sec per variation'), the dual return path (inline finished post vs postId + 'still in progress'), the polling requirement, the concurrency guard, and the subreddit-not-onboarded edge case that yields a `subredditNotice`. This is exemplary for an unannotated tool.

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 roughly 120 words across four sentences, but every sentence earns its place: purpose, latency, async/return behavior, polling + do-not-repeat, and the subreddit-notice edge case. It is front-loaded with the most critical facts (async, purpose) and remains efficient given the tool's complexity.

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 9-parameter async tool with no output schema, this description covers the full user contract: purpose, latency, return paths, polling target, concurrency guidance, and edge-case behavior. It does not describe the structure of the returned Reddit post or enumerate other operationStatus values, but the essential interaction is thoroughly specified.

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% — every parameter (subreddit, sourcePostId, sourceContent, variations, etc.) already has a meaningful description. The tool description adds behavioral context around the subreddit parameter (non-pool handling) but no new parameter-level semantics, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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?

Opens with a specific verb+resource+outcome: 'Rewrite a blog article (or raw content) into a Reddit-native post for a specific subreddit.' It further differentiates from siblings by stating 'Flow step 3 of 4: pool → suggest → REWRITE → list_posts', explicitly positioning this tool as the rewrite stage rather than the suggest or list stages.

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?

Provides an explicit exclusion ('Do NOT call reddit_rewrite again for the same request while it's pending') and an explicit alternative ('Poll get_post with that postId until operationStatus is COMPLETED'). The flow-step note implies natural usage timing, but it does not compare against generic rewrite tools like rewrite_text or generate_post, so it misses some alternative-context guidance.

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