reddit_topic_research

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of disclosing behavior. It communicates that the operation is a non-mutating search and highlights the returned data, but it does not disclose rate limits, authentication requirements, default sorting behavior, or that responses are read-only. For a simple search tool this is adequate but not rich.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence packs the action, target, and output highlights with no filler. Every word 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?

The output schema covers return details, so not explaining response format is acceptable. However, the description is incomplete as a call specification: six undocumented parameters, no usage guidance, and no mention of defaults or constraints. An agent could invoke it with the required query, but would have to guess at optional parameter semantics.

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 0%, and the description adds no meaning for any of the six parameters. Even though param names are self-evident, the description does not explain query syntax, allowable sort/time_filter values, limit bounds, or the format parameter.

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 begins with a specific verb ('Search') and a clear resource ('Reddit'), and further scopes the result set to posts about a topic while naming the key returned elements: scores, comments, and top comment excerpts. It is easy to distinguish from sibling tools like youtube_topic_research or google_trends_explorer.

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 use case is implied by the tool name and 'Search Reddit for posts about a topic,' but the description does not explicitly state when to prefer this over sibling research tools or mention exclusions/limitations. There is no when-not-to-use guidance.

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