social_get_reddit_stats

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. It clearly indicates a read operation ('Get') and lists the returned metrics, but does not disclose potential limitations, response format, or any authentication/rate-limit requirements.

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 a single concise sentence, front-loaded with the action, and contains no redundant information.

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 simple single-parameter read tool, the description covers purpose, input, and output metrics. It lacks details on historical vs current data or response structure, but no output schema exists to fill that gap; still, the description is sufficient for basic invocation.

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 fully documents the single parameter 'symbol' with an example ('BTC'), providing 100% coverage. The description adds little beyond restating the cryptocurrency context, so the baseline 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 uses a specific verb 'Get' and a clear resource 'Reddit statistics for a cryptocurrency', enumerating the metrics (subscribers, active users, posts). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like social_get_twitter_stats and social_get_github_stats.

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 a clear context for when to use the tool: to retrieve Reddit statistics for a cryptocurrency. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, but the purpose is unambiguous and sufficient for a simple read tool.

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