reddit_get_more_comments

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so no contradiction exists. The description adds meaningful behavioral context beyond that: it can reach the tail of a deep thread and specifically continues where the previous fetch stopped, while re-fetching repeats top-level branches. It does not describe response shape or error behavior, but the core behavior is well disclosed.

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 three sentences with no filler. The action is front-loaded, the required inputs are stated immediately, and the final sentence explains the tool's unique value without repeating schema details.

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 two-parameter read-only tool, the description is nearly complete: it defines the source data, the invocation inputs, and the limitation of the alternative. There is no output schema, and the description does not describe the return format, but the operation is simple and the context is strong enough 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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds value by emphasizing that the ids must come from one unexpanded stub, reinforcing a constraint not fully explicit in the schema, and by linking both parameters to the workflow described in reddit_get_post.

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 and resource: 'Expand the reply stubs reddit_get_post reported under `unexpanded`.' It directly states what the tool does and clearly differentiates it from reddit_get_post, so an agent can recognize its distinct role.

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 tells the agent when to use this tool: after reddit_get_post returns unexpanded stubs, pass the post id and ids from one stub. It also explains why the alternative of re-fetching with a larger maxDepth will not work, making the selection guidance unambiguous.

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