Get post

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds no further behavioral context — nothing about authentication requirements, error behavior for invalid/missing IDs, or rate limits — so it contributes essentially nothing beyond the structured fields.

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 short sentence with zero filler, and the identifier format is front-loaded immediately after the purpose. Appropriately sized for a one-parameter read tool.

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 simple read-only lookup with annotations covering safety and only one required param, the description is minimally sufficient. However, with no output schema and a large set of overlapping post/structured-post siblings, it leaves the agent without enough to reliably choose this tool over its neighbors.

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 single post_id parameter is undocumented in the schema, so the description must compensate. It partially does so by giving the t3_ prefix format, but it never clarifies whether the full fullname or a bare ID is required, nor what happens on an unknown ID.

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?

States a clear verb+resource ("Get a post by ID") and adds the Reddit fullname prefix convention (t3_...), which tells an agent what kind of identifier it is. It does not distinguish itself from the sibling reddit_ads_get_structured_post or explain how a post differs from a structured post, so it falls short of full sibling differentiation.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites (e.g. auth), and no mention of the obvious alternatives such as reddit_ads_list_posts for discovery or reddit_ads_get_structured_post. The agent must infer usage entirely from the tool name.

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