reddit get post job

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive behavior, so the description's added value is the scoping constraint: the receipt is signed and bound to the account/process that created the job. That is meaningful ownership/authorization context beyond the structured fields. It doesn't describe job state transitions or polling backoff, but the output schema covers the return shape.

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?

Two sentences, no waste, with the core action front-loaded ahead of the ownership caveat. Nothing in it is filler.

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 two-parameter poll operation with a rich output schema and full annotation coverage, the description supplies what's missing: the receipt's provenance and its account scoping. Only polling cadence or expected job states would add more.

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 coverage is 100%, with both parameters fully documented in the schema (including the seven-day receipt validity and the a2_ account ID pattern). The description only restates that the receipt is a signed job receipt, adding little beyond the schema, so 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: poll a previously created structured post via its job receipt. This clearly distinguishes it from the plain reddit_get_post sibling, though it never names that sibling explicitly. An agent can identify the operation without reading the schema.

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?

It signals the usage context (polling a job you previously created) and includes an explicit exclusion: it does not accept arbitrary job IDs from another account. It stops short of naming the alternative tool an agent should use if it just wants a post by ID.

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