search_posts

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

Annotations already mark the tool as read-only, open-world, and idempotent, so the description focuses on additional behavioral details. It discloses that Arctic Shift archives posts immediately and backfills vote data after ~36h, making score and num_comments placeholders on recent posts, and warns about possible timeouts. This is high-value context beyond the 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 is compact and front-loaded: the first sentence states the purpose, the second covers parameter constraints, and the third explains the important data caveat. No filler sentences; every part earns its place.

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?

Despite having 13 parameters, the description focuses on the essential usage constraints and the major data-quality caveat that could mislead users. Return format is already addressed in the schema's raw parameter description, and annotations provide safety context, so the description is complete for practical use.

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 covers all 13 parameters with 100% coverage, so the baseline is met. The description adds cross-parameter semantics by explaining that query, title, and selftext are only accepted with subreddit or author, and that a date range makes them reliable—constraints not visible from individual schema entries.

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 opens with 'Find posts by subreddit, author, keyword or date range,' using a specific verb and resource scope that clearly distinguishes search_posts from sibling tools like get_posts and search_comments. It communicates the core search capability immediately and effectively.

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 gives explicit usage constraints: keyword parameters require subreddit or author, and a date range improves reliability. It doesn't explicitly compare to sibling tools or state when to prefer this tool over others, but the parameter-level guidance is clear and actionable.

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