How a Reddit post did

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description reinforces this with 'Read-only' and adds non-annotation context: '0 credits' (cost) and 'Needs Reddit connected' (prerequisite). It also discloses the return fields. There is no contradiction with annotations, and the additional info goes beyond what annotations provide.

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?

The description is two concise sentences, front-loading the action and return data, then providing usage context and prerequisites. No filler or repetition. Every sentence contributes value.

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 single-parameter read-only tool with annotations covering safety, the description fully covers what it does, when to use it, prerequisites (Reddit connected), cost (0 credits), and return contents. Since there is no output schema, the description compensates by listing returned fields. Nothing critical is missing for an agent to invoke it correctly.

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?

The input schema provides full coverage (100%) for postId with a description explaining valid formats: 'the id returned by post_to_reddit, its t3_… fullname, or the full reddit.com permalink'. The description does not add further parameter detail, so baseline 3 is appropriate since the schema already documents the one parameter thoroughly.

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 uses a specific verb ('Read'), a clear resource ('one of the connected account’s Reddit posts'), and enumerates the exact data returned (score, comment count, upvote ratio, flair, removal status). It distinguishes itself from sibling operations like list_reddit_posts, edit_reddit_post, and delete_reddit_post by focusing on post performance metrics. The title 'How a Reddit post did' reinforces this.

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 description explicitly states when to use it: for 'how did that post do' or to judge which framing a community rewarded before writing the next one. It implies a read/analytics context but does not name specific alternatives or exclusions. Given the large sibling list, it could have pointed to list_reddit_posts for listing, but the purpose is clear enough.

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