get_reddit_post

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. 'Get a Reddit post' implies a read-only operation, but it doesn't specify authentication requirements, rate limits, error handling, or what data is returned (e.g., title, body, upvotes). For a tool with zero annotation coverage, this leaves critical behavioral aspects undocumented.

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 extremely concise ('Get a Reddit post')—a single sentence with no wasted words. It's front-loaded with the core action. However, this brevity comes at the cost of completeness, as it omits necessary context for effective tool selection and use.

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?

Given the tool's moderate complexity (2 required parameters, no output schema, and no annotations), the description is incomplete. It doesn't address return values, error cases, or how it differs from siblings. While the schema covers parameters, the lack of behavioral and contextual information makes this inadequate for a tool in a server with many similar alternatives.

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%, with clear descriptions for both parameters ('post_id' and 'subreddit'). The description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema provides—it doesn't explain parameter relationships (e.g., that 'post_id' might be relative to 'subreddit') or usage nuances. With high schema coverage, the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 'Get a Reddit post' clearly states the verb ('Get') and resource ('Reddit post'), making the basic purpose understandable. However, it doesn't differentiate this tool from similar siblings like 'get_post_comments' or 'get_top_posts', which also retrieve Reddit content. The description is functional but lacks specificity about what exactly is retrieved (e.g., post metadata, content, or both).

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. With siblings like 'get_post_comments' (for comments), 'get_top_posts' (for popular posts), and 'search_reddit' (for broader searches), there's no indication that this tool is specifically for fetching a single post by ID. The agent must infer usage from the parameter names alone, which is insufficient.

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