get_post_details

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It effectively describes the tool's behavior: it fetches a post with comments, requires either url or post_id, and explains the performance impact of using post_id alone (an extra API call) versus with subreddit (1 call total). This covers key operational traits like API call efficiency, though it doesn't mention rate limits, authentication needs, or error handling.

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 appropriately sized and front-loaded: it starts with the core purpose, then immediately provides critical usage guidelines and efficiency tips in three clear sentences. Every sentence earns its place by adding essential information without redundancy, making it highly efficient.

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 (8 parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description is largely complete. It covers the purpose, usage, and key behavioral aspects like API call efficiency. However, it lacks details on output format (e.g., structure of returned post/comments) and error scenarios, which would be helpful since there's no output schema.

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 schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents all 8 parameters thoroughly. The description adds minimal semantic value beyond the schema: it clarifies the relationship between post_id and subreddit for performance, but doesn't provide additional context about parameters like comment_depth or extract_links. This meets the baseline of 3 when schema coverage is high.

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 explicitly states the verb 'fetch' and the resource 'Reddit post with its comments', making the purpose clear. It distinguishes from siblings like 'browse_subreddit' (which likely lists posts) and 'search_reddit' (which searches across posts) by focusing on retrieving a specific post and its comments.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool: to fetch a post with comments. It specifies alternatives for input parameters (url OR post_id) and advises on efficiency: 'For better efficiency, always provide the subreddit parameter when known'. This directly addresses when to use certain parameters over others, though it doesn't explicitly compare to sibling tools.

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