Searches Reddit communities by query, with optional NSFW filtering and pagination to locate relevant subreddits for a topic.
Search communities
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| q | Yes | Search query | |
| nsfw | No | true to include NSFW results | |
| after | No | Pagination cursor from a previous response | |
| limit | No | Items to return, 1-100 |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The description adds no behavioral details beyond the readOnlyHint annotation. It does not mention pagination behavior, result ordering, or any side effects, leaving the agent with no information about what happens when the tool is called.
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 extremely concise, consisting of only two words. While it is succinct, it lacks any structured information such as examples, context, or clarifying details, making it too minimal to be highly effective.
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?
The description is incomplete for a tool with four parameters and no output schema. It does not explain what 'communities' refers to, what the expected output format is, or how the parameters affect the search, leaving the agent without essential context.
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 schema already provides descriptions for all four parameters (q, nsfw, after, limit), so the description adds no extra meaning. The baseline of 3 is appropriate because the schema coverage is complete but the description itself contributes nothing additional.
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 the action 'Search communities' with a clear verb and resource, but it lacks specificity about what constitutes a 'community' and the scope of the search. It is not as precise as sibling tools like get_sub_by_name_top or get_search_comments.
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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_search_comments, get_search_media, or get_search_users. It does not mention any conditions, filters, or use cases.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.