reddit get targeting options

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

Annotations already establish read-only, idempotent, open-world behavior, so the description's job is to add non-obvious traits. It does: pagination for large lists and the fact that results may be explicitly marked partial (truncated), which is meaningful for a lookup agent. Permissions or rate-limit behavior are not mentioned, keeping it below a 5.

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 short, front-loaded sentences with no filler. It is efficient, though the terseness means the search and pagination notes read as asides rather than organized guidance.

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 a full schema, rich annotations, and an output schema, the description does not need to explain return values. Still, for a six-parameter tool spanning six targeting kinds, it omits any hint about which kinds accept country or query, leaving the agent to infer from the schema alone.

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%, so the schema already documents kind, limit, query, cursor, country, and adAccountId in detail. The description only re-touches two of them (search for communities, pagination), adding marginal value over the structured fields, so baseline 3 is correct.

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 states a specific verb and resource ('discover valid native targeting values'), so an agent can tell this is a value-lookup endpoint. However, it never contrasts with the similarly named sibling reddit_get_targeting, which is the most likely confusion point.

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?

'Communities can be searched' and 'large lists are paginated or explicitly marked partial' imply when the query/cursor parameters matter. But there is no explicit guidance on when to choose this tool over reddit_get_targeting or when not to use it.

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