reddit get creative assets

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, non-destructive and open-world, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds one genuinely useful semantic caveat (library assets ≠ ads) but says nothing about ordering, result volume, or pagination behavior beyond what the schema's limit/cursor fields already convey.

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 compact sentence with the core action front-loaded and no filler. It is efficient, though the semicolon clause packs in a caveat that could be phrased more directly.

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 an output schema, full annotation coverage, and 100% parameter documentation, most of the burden is carried elsewhere. However, for a paginated list tool the description gives no sense of what an 'asset' is (image/video/etc.) or result volume, leaving it minimally adequate rather than complete.

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% and the parameter descriptions are strong — profileId even points to reddit_get_profiles and adAccountId distinguishes the ad account from the business ID. The description adds no parameter-level meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 specific verb and resource: "List the asset library of a profile attached to the ad account." The trailing clause clarifies what the returned items are (raw library files, not necessarily live ads), which meaningfully separates it from ad/creative listings, though no sibling is named explicitly.

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?

Usage is only implied: the note that "unused files are not necessarily ads" hints this is the raw-library lookup rather than an ad/creative listing. It never names reddit_list_ad_creatives or reddit_get_asset_uploads as alternatives, nor states when to prefer one over the other.

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