reddit_suggest

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

Beyond annotations (none provided), the description discloses key behaviors: synchronous execution, 0 credit cost, requirement of existing brand pool, and detailed output components (angles, promotion mode, buyer intent, match score, key rule). It also explains the verbosity modes (short/medium/full) which affect response shape.

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 dense but every sentence adds value: purpose, output structure, workflow position, prerequisites, and verbosity levels. It is front-loaded with the primary purpose and uses concise bullet-like notation for detail modes, avoiding redundancy.

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?

With no output schema and no annotations, the description carries full burden. It covers the input requirements, output fields, detail levels, flow step, prerequisite, and cost/behavior. For a tool with 5 parameters and complex return data, this is comprehensive and leaves no major gaps.

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 baseline is 3. The description adds meaning by explaining when to use postId vs title+content ('by id, or pasted title+text') and clarifies that brandId defaults to active brand. The detail enum is also interpreted in the context of this tool's output.

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 exactly what the tool does: given brand content, return up to 8 best-fit subreddits with posting angles and metadata. It clearly distinguishes itself from siblings by naming the output (subreddit suggestions) and referencing the downstream reddit_rewrite 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?

Explicitly places the tool in a workflow: 'Flow step 2 of 4: pool → SUGGEST → rewrite → list_posts' and states the prerequisite: 'Requires the brand pool to exist — call reddit_generate_pool first if it doesn't.' This provides clear when-to-use and sequential context.

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