Reddit billing + posting profiles

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, covering the safety profile. The description adds the useful detail that returned funding instrument IDs must be 'servable' and that both funding instruments and posting profiles come from this endpoint, but it does not describe response structure, pagination, or account-resolution behavior. This is acceptable but not deeply transparent.

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 short, front-loaded with what the tool returns, and then gives essential downstream usage context. Every sentence earns its place and no filler is present.

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 read-only listing tool with one optional parameter and an output schema, the description explains why the data matters and which downstream tools consume it. The main gap is the lack of any guidance about ad_account_id, but the output schema and simple parameter shape keep this from being a serious omission.

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 0%, and the description never mentions the ad_account_id parameter, its optionality, default behavior, or how to obtain a valid account ID. The parameter name is self-explanatory, but the description does not compensate for the schema's lack of documentation.

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 clearly identifies the resource: funding instruments and posting profiles of a Reddit ad account. It also distinguishes the tool's purpose by linking its outputs to the downstream draft_reddit_campaign and draft_reddit_ad tools, so an agent knows exactly what this listing is for.

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 gives concrete usage context: use this tool when you need a servable funding_instrument_id for draft_reddit_campaign or a profile_id for draft_reddit_ad. It does not explicitly state when not to use it or name alternative listing tools, but the downstream references make the intended use clear.

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