Server Quality Checklist

Tool Scores

• reddit_search_mediaA
  4/5.0
  Behavior4/5

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

  Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, and the description adds meaningful behavioral context by specifying the output fields returned (media URL/type, author, score, post URL) and the kind filter mechanism. No contradictions with annotations.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness5/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  The description is three sentences: a purpose statement, a return-value statement, and a usage example. Every sentence earns its place, it is front-loaded with the core capability, and there is no redundancy.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness4/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  There is no output schema, so the description must explain return values; it lists key fields (media URL/type, author, score, post URL) but omits response-level details like the pagination cursor (after field). The schema description for after mentions the previous response's after field, providing a hint. Overall, it is adequate but could be more thorough about response shape.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters3/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  The input schema covers all 7 parameters with 100% coverage, so the description does not need to repeat them. It adds an example with q and kind, which clarifies usage, but the schema already provides thorough semantics for each parameter.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose5/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  The description clearly states the tool searches Reddit posts with a media filter (images, video, gifs), naming the resource and scope. It explicitly distinguishes itself from the general reddit_search by highlighting the media restriction and listing returned fields (media URL/type, author, score, post URL).

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines3/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  The description implies the use case—media-focused searching—and includes a concrete example with q and kind parameters, but it does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use this tool. It could have said 'Use this instead of reddit_search for media results' to fully guide selection.

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

• reddit_subreddit_topA
  4/5.0
  Behavior4/5

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

  Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description adds value by disclosing the return structure ('score, author, comments, permalink plus an `after` cursor') and an example ('name=\'science\' t=\'month\''). This provides useful behavioral context beyond the safety profile, such as pagination support via the after cursor. No contradictions with annotations.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness5/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  The description is concise: two sentences plus an example. It front-loads the core purpose, then provides return details and a concrete usage example. Every sentence earns its place, and there is no unnecessary fluff.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness4/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  For a simple read-only listing tool with a detailed schema and helpful annotations, the description is quite complete. It covers purpose, return fields, example, and pagination cursor. The only minor gap is that it doesn't explicitly mention parameter constraints (e.g., t allowed values) or that 'after' is for subsequent pages, but the schema already provides these details. Overall, the description plus schema and annotations give a complete picture.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters3/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  Schema description coverage is 100% (all four parameters have descriptions). The description itself does not add much parameter-level detail beyond the schema, but it does provide an example (name='science', t='month') that clarifies how to use the parameters. This meets the baseline for high schema coverage but does not go beyond.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose5/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  The description clearly states the tool's function: 'Get the TOP posts of a subreddit for a time window.' It uses a specific verb ('Get'), identifies the resource ('TOP posts of a subreddit'), and includes the time-window scoping. It also distinguishes from siblings like reddit_subreddit_posts by explicitly emphasizing 'TOP' and 'highest-scoring posts.'

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines3/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  The description implies when to use this tool (for top posts by score within a time window) but does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusion criteria. It lacks guidance like 'use this instead of reddit_subreddit_posts when you need highest-scoring posts' or 'not for sorting by new.' The context is implied but not explicit.

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

• reddit_search_communitiesA
  4.2/5.0
  Behavior4/5

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

  Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is known. The description adds behavioral context by stating that the tool returns matching subreddits with specific fields and that NSFW results can be excluded (via schema param). This goes beyond annotations, though it doesn't detail pagination behavior or rate limits.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness5/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  The description is three sentences, front-loaded with the core function, followed by return fields, usage context, and an example. Every sentence earns its place with no redundancy or filler.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness4/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  For a search tool with 4 parameters and no output schema, the description covers the essential aspects: what it searches, what it returns, and a concrete example. It does not explicitly explain pagination, but the schema's 'after' parameter covers that. The usage guidance connects well to sibling tools, making it nearly complete.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters3/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  Schema coverage is 100%, and each parameter has a detailed description. The description adds one concrete example (q='machine learning') and the general 'by name or topic' clarification, but this only slightly augments the schema's already thorough parameter documentation. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose5/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  The description clearly states the tool's verb and resource: 'Search for subreddits (communities) by name or topic.' It also lists return fields (title, subscriber count, description, NSFW flag), and the usage context ('discover where a topic is discussed') distinguishes it from sibling tools like reddit_search which search posts/comments.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines4/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  The description gives clear usage context: 'Use to discover where a topic is discussed before listing or searching its posts.' This implies the tool should be used first to find subreddits, then other tools for posts. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use it, so it falls short of a 5.

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

• reddit_subreddit_commentsA
  4.2/5.0
  Behavior4/5

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

  Annotations already indicate read-only and non-destructive. Description adds behavioral context: the feed nature, the `after` cursor for pagination, and the type of data returned. This goes beyond annotations by explaining the polling pattern and result composition.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness5/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  Three short, purposeful sentences. Front-loaded with the core action, then return fields, then usage example. No redundant info.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness4/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  No output schema, so the description compensates by listing return fields (body, author, score, etc.) and mentioning the after cursor. With 3 params and a simple read operation, this is solid, though it could mention any rate-limit or latency caveats for a 'stream'.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters3/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  Schema covers all parameters with detailed descriptions (100% coverage). The description adds an example value for `name` and links `after` to polling, but this is marginal beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose5/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  Clearly identifies the tool as streaming newest comments across a subreddit, explicitly distinguishing from a single post's thread. Provides specific verb ('Stream'), resource ('entire subreddit'), and return field overview. Distinguished from sibling reddit_post_comments via 'not one post's thread'.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines4/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  Gives clear usage context: polling to catch new comments in a community, and excludes the single-post-thread use case. However, it does not name an explicit alternative tool like reddit_post_comments, so it falls short of fully explicit 'use X instead' guidance.

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

• reddit_postA
  4.3/5.0
  Behavior4/5

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

  Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so safety is covered. The description adds behavioral context about return fields and the exact id format (base-36, no 't3_' prefix), which goes beyond the annotations and helps the agent know what to expect.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness5/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  The description is three sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose, then return details, then usage example. Every sentence earns its place with no redundancy or fluff.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness5/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  For a simple single-read tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description is fully complete. It explains what the tool returns, when to use it, and the exact id format, making it self-sufficient for an agent.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters3/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  The schema covers 100% of the parameter details (base-36 id, no prefix, required). The description repeats this information and adds an example, but does not meaningfully extend beyond what the schema already provides. Baseline 3 is appropriate since the schema does the heavy lifting.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose5/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  The description clearly states the specific verb 'fetch' and resource 'a single Reddit post by its id', and lists the returned fields. It distinguishes itself from siblings by specifying 'single post' and noting the id input, which separates it from subreddit listings and searches.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines4/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  The description explicitly says 'Use when you already have a post id and want its details', providing clear context for when to use this tool. It does not mention when not to use it or alternative tools, but the usage condition is specific and actionable enough.

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

• reddit_search_usersA
  4.3/5.0
  Behavior3/5

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

  Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds that it returns username, karma, and account age, which is useful context, but it doesn't disclose additional behavioral traits like pagination limits or rate limits. This is adequate but not rich.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness5/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  The description is two concise sentences plus an example, with no wasted words. The first sentence states what it does, the second explains why and when to use it, and the example provides a quick reference. Perfectly front-loaded.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness5/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  Given the 4-parameter schema with full descriptions and read-only annotations, the description is complete for a search tool. It covers the tool's scope, return fields, use case, and an example. No output schema exists, so the description's mention of return values is necessary and provided.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters4/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  Schema description coverage is 100% with detailed docs for all parameters, so the baseline is 3. The description adds a concrete example q='spez' and clarifies 'by name or keyword', which enhances understanding beyond the schema's formal parameter descriptions.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose5/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  The description clearly states the verb 'Search' and the specific resource 'Reddit users (redditors)', with scope 'by name or keyword'. It also differentiates from sibling tools by focusing on user search, and provides an example (q='spez') that reinforces the tool's specific purpose.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines4/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  The description gives clear context: 'Use to find a person's handle before fetching their profile or comments.' This provides an explicit use case and implies when to choose this tool over alternatives. However, it doesn't explicitly mention when not to use it or name alternative tools.

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

• reddit_subreddit_aboutA
  4.3/5.0
  Behavior4/5

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

  Annotations already mark this as read-only and non-destructive. The description adds context by specifying it returns public metadata and lists the fields, which goes beyond the annotations. It does not contradict them.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness5/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  The description is three sentences, front-loaded with the action, and each sentence contributes value: purpose, return fields, and usage guidance. No redundancy or fluff.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness5/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  For a simple read-only metadata tool with one well-documented parameter, the description fully covers purpose, usage, and return values. The lack of an output schema is compensated by listing the returned fields.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters3/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  Schema coverage is 100%, so the parameter is fully described in the schema (e.g., 'WITHOUT the r/ prefix'). The description adds an example ('name='python'') that reinforces this, but provides no new semantic information.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose5/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  The description states a specific verb and resource: 'Fetch a subreddit's public metadata by name.' It clearly distinguishes this from sibling tools that deal with posts, comments, or searches, and it enumerates the exact fields returned.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines4/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  The description gives explicit usage context: 'Use it to size or vet a community before listing or searching its posts.' This indicates when to use the tool, though it does not explicitly name alternative tools or state when not to use it.

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

• reddit_subreddit_moderatorsA
  4.3/5.0
  Behavior4/5

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

  Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description adds useful behavioral context by naming the underlying endpoint (/about/moderators) and detailing the return fields (name, id, mod_permissions, etc.), including the meaning of 'added'.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness5/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  The description is compact: two sentences and an example. It front-loads the main purpose and each sentence adds value — endpoint, return structure, usage, and example. No wasted words.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness5/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  For a simple read-only tool with one parameter, the description covers the purpose, usage context, return format, and parameter example. The schema and annotations fill in the remaining safety and parameter details, making it complete.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters3/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  The input schema already fully describes the 'name' parameter (required, no r/ prefix, path parameter). The description's example 'name='python'' reinforces the format but does not add new semantic information beyond the schema.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose5/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  The description clearly states the action ('Fetch a subreddit's moderator team') and the specific resource (subreddit by name). It explicitly distinguishes this tool from siblings like reddit_subreddit_about or reddit_subreddit_rules by focusing on moderator team data.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines4/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  Provides a clear use case: 'Use it to see who moderates a community.' However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it, which would have made the guidance more complete.

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

• reddit_user_commentsA
  4.3/5.0
  Behavior4/5

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

  Annotations already establish read-only/non-destructive safety. The description adds return shape (body, score, subreddit, parent link, timestamp) and pagination via `after` cursor, plus an example. No contradiction with annotations.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness5/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  Two sentences pack purpose, output fields, usage, and example with no filler. Information is front-loaded and every sentence earns its place.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness5/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  For a list tool with no output schema, the description covers return fields, pagination behavior, and a typical use case. The example clarifies the required parameter format.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters3/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  All four parameters are fully documented in the schema (100% coverage), so the description adds little semantic value. The example 'name=... sort=...' reinforces existing schema details but doesn't go beyond them.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose5/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  Description opens with 'List a Reddit user's recent comments', a specific verb+resource. It names returned fields and example, clearly differentiating from siblings like reddit_user_submitted (posts) or reddit_user_profile.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines4/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  It provides explicit use context: 'Use to understand what a redditor talks about or to gather their opinions.' No explicit when-not/alternative names are given, but the use case is clear enough to guide selection among sibling tools.

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

• reddit_user_profileA
  4.3/5.0
  Behavior4/5

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

  Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds value by detailing the return contents (username, id, karma, account age, flags, avatar) and providing an example, which goes beyond the annotations.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness5/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  The description is two sentences plus an example, front-loaded with the verb and resource, and contains no filler. Every sentence earns its place.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness5/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  For a simple, read-only tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description provides a complete picture: what it does, what it returns, and an example. It appropriately scopes itself against numerous sibling tools, making it self-contained.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters3/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  The input schema provides 100% coverage with a clear description of the 'name' parameter including the 'u/' prefix constraint and path parameter status. The description only adds a redundant example ('spez'), so it does not significantly enhance parameter understanding beyond the schema.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose5/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  The description clearly states a specific verb and resource: 'Fetch a Reddit user's public profile by username.' It distinguishes itself from sibling tools by focusing on profile metadata (karma, account age, flags) rather than posts or comments, and provides an explicit use case: 'vet or summarize a redditor.'

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines4/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  The description gives a clear use case ('Use to vet or summarize a redditor'), implying when this tool is appropriate. It does not explicitly name alternatives like reddit_user_comments or reddit_user_submitted, but the distinction between 'profile' and 'activity' is clear enough.

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

• reddit_by_idA
  4.5/5.0
  Behavior5/5

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

  Beyond the annotations (readOnlyHint, destructiveHint), the description discloses key behaviors: the 100-post limit, the absence of unknown IDs from results, and the exact return fields (title, author, score, comment count, permalink). This adds significant value for an agent invoking the tool.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness5/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  The description is three sentences, front-loaded with the primary purpose, and includes an example without any fluff. Every sentence contributes useful information.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness5/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  With a single parameter, no output schema, and good annotations, the description covers return shape, edge cases, limits, and an example. No critical information is missing for an agent to select and invoke the tool correctly.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters3/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  Schema description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description repeats the schema details and provides an example, but does not add new semantic meaning beyond what the schema already documents.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose5/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  The description clearly states a specific verb-resource pair ('Bulk-fetch posts by their t3_ fullnames') and distinguishes the tool from siblings by emphasizing the bulk/one-call capability versus a request per post. It also communicates the intended use case (hydrating posts from a search or listing).

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines4/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  The description provides clear context on when to use this tool ('fullnames you already have from a search or listing') and contrasts with a per-post request approach. However, it does not explicitly name alternative sibling tools or state exclusions, so it stops short of a 5.

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

• reddit_post_commentsA
  4.5/5.0
  Behavior4/5

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

  Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, establishing the safety profile. The description augments this by disclosing the return format (post plus threaded comments with author, body, score, replies) and pagination via an 'after' cursor. It does not discuss rate limits or auth, but the provided context goes beyond annotation basics.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness5/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  Three sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose, followed by return details and usage context. No filler or redundancy; every sentence earns its place.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness5/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  For a single-parameter read-only tool with no output schema, the description covers what it returns, the pagination cursor, and the proper triggering context. It is self-sufficient for an agent to select and invoke it correctly.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters4/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  Schema coverage is 100% since 'permalink' has a clear description with an example. The description additionally tells the agent to 'Pass the post's permalink from a prior result,' which adds provenance guidance beyond the schema's static definition.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose5/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  The description clearly states the action ('Fetch a single post and its comment tree by permalink') with specific resource and scope. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like 'reddit_post' or 'reddit_search_comments' by specifying it returns the full comment tree, not just the post or search results.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines4/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  The description provides clear context for when to use the tool: 'Use after finding a post via search/listing to read the full discussion.' It implies a workflow but does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternative tools, so it falls short of the full 5.

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

• reddit_subreddit_postsA
  4.5/5.0
  Behavior4/5

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

  Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds behavioral detail about output fields and pagination ('plus an `after` cursor for paging'), which is beyond what annotations provide. No contradictions.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness5/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  Four sentences, front-loaded with the primary purpose, no redundant words. Every sentence adds value: purpose, usage, return values, and an example. Highly concise.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness5/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  For a 5-parameter read-only list tool with no output schema, the description covers purpose, usage, return fields, pagination cursor, and provides an example. The annotations cover safety. This is fully sufficient for an agent to select and invoke the tool.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters4/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  Input schema has 100% description coverage for all 5 parameters, so the baseline is 3. The description adds an example ('subreddit=programming sort=top t=week') that clarifies how the parameters combine, and clarifies the `t` parameter's role (only for 'top'/'controversial') is already in schema, but the example adds value. Thus a 4 is appropriate.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose5/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  The description uses a specific verb phrase 'List posts from a subreddit by sort order' and clearly identifies the resource and action. It distinguishes from sibling search/comment tools by framing this as reading a community's feed. The mention of return fields (title, author, score) adds further specificity.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines4/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  The description explicitly states 'Use this to read a community's feed' with sort options (newest, hot/trending, top-of-week, rising), providing clear context for when to invoke. It does not name alternative tools or exclusions, so it stops short of a full 5, but the usage context is unambiguous.

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

• reddit_subreddit_rulesA
  4.5/5.0
  Behavior4/5

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

  Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, and the description aligns with these. It adds valuable context about the return structure (rules and site_rules lists) and the data source (/r/<name>/about/rules), going beyond the annotations.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness5/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  The description is two sentences plus an example, front-loaded with the main purpose. Every sentence contributes: purpose, return details, use case, and example. No redundancy or wasted words.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness5/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  With no output schema, the description thoroughly explains return values (rules list with specific fields and site_rules list). It also includes usage context and an example, making the tool fully understood for a simple read-only fetch.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters4/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  Schema coverage is 100% with a clear description for the 'name' parameter. The tool description reinforces the format (WITHOUT r/ prefix) and provides an example (name='python'), adding practical clarity beyond the schema.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose5/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  The description clearly states 'Fetch a subreddit's posting rules by name' with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like reddit_subreddit_about and reddit_subreddit_moderators by focusing on posting rules, not general info or moderators.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines4/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  The description provides a clear use context: 'Use it to check a community's rules before posting or commenting.' It doesn't mention when not to use or alternative tools, but the primary use case is explicitly stated.

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

• reddit_subreddits_defaultA
  4.5/5.0
  Behavior4/5

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

  Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds value by detailing the return structure (subreddits list with fields) and the paging mechanism ('after' cursor), going beyond the annotations.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness5/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  Two focused sentences: the first states the purpose, the second gives return details and a sibling distinction. No wasted words or redundant information.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness5/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  With low complexity (2 optional params, no output schema) and safe-read annotations, the description sufficiently covers return shape, paging, and alternatives, allowing an agent to select and invoke the tool correctly.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters3/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  Schema coverage is 100% and both parameters are fully described in the input schema. The description mentions the 'after' cursor for paging but doesn't add syntax or behavior beyond what the schema already provides, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose5/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  The description clearly identifies the tool as browsing Reddit's default front-page set of subreddits, using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from siblings by explicitly contrasting with reddit_search_communities for keyword search.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines5/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  It explicitly states 'no keyword needed' and directs users to reddit_search_communities when keyword search is required, providing clear when-to-use guidance and an explicit alternative.

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

• reddit_subreddits_newA
  4.5/5.0
  Behavior4/5

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

  Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds value beyond that by disclosing the return structure (list of subreddits with specific fields) and pagination behavior (after cursor). This is more than mere restatement and provides useful behavioral context.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness5/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  The description is three sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose, followed by output details and a clear alternative tool reference. Every sentence contributes meaningful information with no redundancy or filler.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness5/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  Given the simple 2-parameter schema and no output schema, the description fully covers what an agent needs: it explains the return fields, the pagination cursor, and the difference from a sibling tool. This is sufficient for a read-only listing operation.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters3/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  The schema covers 100% of parameters with detailed descriptions for 'after' and 'limit'. The tool description mentions the 'after' cursor but does not add further meaning beyond the schema. With full schema coverage, a baseline of 3 is appropriate; the description does not contribute extra semantic value.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose5/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  The description clearly identifies the action ('Browse the newest subreddits') and the specific resource, distinguishing it from sibling tools by framing it as recency-based browsing. It explicitly contrasts with reddit_search_communities, making the purpose unambiguous.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines5/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  The description states when to use this tool ('newest subreddits, no keyword needed') and explicitly names the alternative for keyword-based searches: 'use reddit_search_communities instead to SEARCH communities by keyword.' This provides clear when/when-not guidance.

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

• reddit_subreddits_popularA
  4.5/5.0
  Behavior4/5

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

  Annotations already establish read-only and non-destructive behavior. The description adds valuable context about the return shape (subreddits list with specific fields) and the pagination cursor mechanism, enhancing transparency beyond what annotations provide.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness5/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  Three succinct sentences: purpose, return format, and sibling-tool distinction. No filler, front-loaded with the core action, and every sentence adds unique value.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness5/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  For a simple read-only browsing tool with two optional parameters and no output schema, the description covers purpose, return fields, pagination, and usage guidance. It is complete and self-sufficient for an AI agent to select and invoke correctly.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters3/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  Schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema fully documents both `after` and `limit` with detailed descriptions. The tool description only repeats the `after` cursor concept without adding new semantics, so a baseline of 3 is appropriate.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose5/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  The description uses a specific verb ('Browse') with a clear resource ('most-subscribed, trending subreddits'), explicitly noting no keyword is needed. It also distinguishes this tool from reddit_search_communities (search by keyword), making the purpose unambiguous.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines5/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  It clearly states when to use this tool (browsing by popularity, no keyword) and explicitly names reddit_search_communities as the alternative for keyword search. Pagination behavior via the `after` cursor is also mentioned, giving concrete usage context.

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

• reddit_subreddit_wikiA
  4.5/5.0
  Behavior4/5

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

  Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is known. The description adds value by detailing the return object (content_md, content_html, may_revise, revision fields) and noting multi-segment pages, which goes beyond the schema and annotations.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness5/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  The description is four sentences, front-loaded with the primary action, and each sentence adds distinct information (function, return format, usage guidance, example). No wasted words or redundancy with the schema.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness5/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  For a simple read-only tool with no output schema, the description thoroughly covers return values, usage context, and an example. It is complete enough for an agent to select and invoke correctly without additional documentation.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters4/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  Schema description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description enhances this by providing a concrete example (name='python', page='index') and reiterating the multi-segment possibility, adding practical usage context beyond the schema definitions.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose5/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  The description clearly states the tool fetches a subreddit's wiki page by name and page, using the specific verb 'Fetch' and identifying the resource as a wiki page. It distinguishes from siblings like reddit_subreddit_rules by covering general wiki content (rules, FAQ, config/sidebar) and provides a concrete example.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines4/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  It explicitly states 'Use it to read a community's wiki, such as its rules or FAQ', giving clear context for when to use. It does not name alternatives or provide exclusions (e.g., for rules specifically), but the purpose is well-scoped and the example clarifies usage.

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

• reddit_user_submittedA
  4.5/5.0
  Behavior4/5

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

  Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, eliminating concerns about mutation. The description adds valuable behavioral details beyond this, such as the specific fields returned ('title, author, score, comment count, and permalink') and the pagination mechanism ('plus an `after` cursor'). This gives the agent a clear model of what to expect from the response.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness5/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  The description is a compact two sentences plus an example. It front-loads the core purpose and provides essential details without unnecessary fluff. Every sentence contributes value, making it highly efficient for an agent to parse.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness5/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  Even though there is no output schema, the description explicitly enumerates the return fields and pagination cursor, giving the agent a complete picture. For a read-only list operation with well-documented parameters, this description is fully sufficient without needing additional context.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters4/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  Schema description coverage is 100%, so the parameters are thoroughly documented in the schema itself. The description adds contextual value through the example ('name='spez' sort='top'') which clarifies usage patterns. It also reinforces the meaning of the `after` cursor for pagination, aligning with the schema's description.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose5/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  The description opens with 'List a Reddit user's submitted POSTS,' a specific verb and resource that clearly defines the tool's function. It further distinguishes itself from the sibling tool by explicitly calling out 'the sibling of reddit_user_comments,' making the purpose unambiguous.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines4/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  The description provides clear context for use: 'Use to see what a redditor posts, not just what they comment on.' This differentiates it from the sibling tool reddit_user_comments. It also includes a concrete example ('name='spez' sort='top'') to illustrate invocation, though it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or other alternatives.

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

• reddit_search_commentsA
  4.6/5.0
  Behavior5/5

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

  Beyond the readOnly/openWorld/destructive annotations, the description discloses critical behavioral quirks: the search matches comment bodies but returns posts, and Reddit does not expose which specific comment matched. It also states the post fields returned, providing substantial context for real behavior.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness4/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  The description is well-structured and front-loaded with the core behavior, followed by usage context, a limitation reminder, and an example. It is slightly repetitive in emphasizing that posts are returned, but all sentences carry important information without unnecessary padding.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness5/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  Given the tool's surprising behavior and lack of output schema, the description fully informs the agent of what to expect: posts with title, selftext, score, and comment count. It also provides a concrete example and alternative tool reference, making it complete for invocation decisions.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters3/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  The schema descriptions already cover all six parameters in detail (100% coverage). The description adds only a usage example (q and sort), which does not meaningfully deepen parameter understanding beyond the schema. Baseline of 3 is appropriate.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose5/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  The description clearly states the tool searches Reddit by comment text and explicitly clarifies the surprising behavior that it returns parent posts, not individual comments. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools by contrasting with 'plain post-title search' and redirecting to reddit_deep_comment_search for actual comment bodies.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines5/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  Provides explicit usage guidance: use it to surface threads where a topic appears in replies that post-title search would miss, and use reddit_deep_comment_search when comment bodies are needed. This gives a clear when-to-use and when-not-to-use direction relative to alternatives.

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

• reddit_searchA
  4.7/5.0
  Behavior5/5

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

  Beyond the annotations (readOnlyHint, destructiveHint), the description discloses a crucial behavioral trait: filters are applied to the returned page, not the search itself, with a `meta` object to indicate page completeness and a requirement to paginate for full filtering. This is non-obvious, decision-relevant context.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness5/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  The description is a well-structured paragraph that front-loads the purpose, covers use cases, explains the filtering caveat, and ends with a concrete example. Every sentence earns its place; no filler or redundancy.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness5/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  Despite 19 parameters and no output schema, the description provides sufficient orientation: return fields, pagination, the post-filtering caveat, subreddit scoping, and an example. The schema handles individual parameter details, so the description completes the high-level picture without gaps.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters4/5

  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 meaningful semantics by explaining the role of `subreddit`, grouping advanced filters, and showing an example with `q`, `sort`, and `t`. It reinforces how `after` enables pagination, adding value beyond the schema.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose5/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  The description opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Search Reddit posts across all of Reddit or within one subreddit.' It clearly distinguishes this tool from siblings like reddit_search_comments and reddit_search_communities by focusing on posts, and it enumerates the return fields (author, score, comments, permalink, after cursor).

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines4/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  The description provides explicit use cases ('topic/keyword research, brand monitoring, or finding discussions') and explains how to scope to a subreddit. It doesn't explicitly name sibling alternatives for exclusion, but the scope and feature set clearly imply when this tool is appropriate.

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

• reddit_deep_comment_searchA
  5/5.0
  Behavior5/5

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

  Annotations already mark it as read-only and non-destructive, but the description goes beyond by disclosing that it is a 'premium call' that 'fans out into several reads', that matching is on visible comment text at word boundaries, and that results are 'best-effort' with meta.truncated flags. This is exactly the kind of context beyond standard annotations.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness5/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  The description is long but every sentence earns its place, covering purpose, differentiation, cost, pagination, limits, matching behavior, and research mode. It is front-loaded with the core purpose and each subsequent detail is necessary for correct usage of a complex tool.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness5/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  With no output schema, the description must explain return fields and behavior, and it does: it lists returned fields (body, score, author, permalink, parent post), mentions meta.truncated for tree-depth issues, and describes group_by output (comment_count, total_score, subreddits, top comment). This makes the tool fully understandable without needing additional documentation.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters5/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  Though the schema already covers 100% of parameters, the description adds critical meaning: limit is clarified as expanding parent posts (not comment count), after is used for pagination, max_comments caps with top-scored kept, and group_by='author' changes the entire response shape. This significantly enriches understanding beyond the schema fields.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose5/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  The description opens with 'Genuine comment search: returns the ACTUAL comments whose body matches your keyword', which is a specific verb+resource statement. It also explicitly distinguishes itself from the sibling tool reddit_search_comments by explaining the Reddit limitation, making its unique purpose unmistakable.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines5/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  It explicitly contrasts with reddit_search_comments ('Unlike reddit_search_comments... this fetches...'), telling the agent when to use this tool instead. It also provides practical usage guidance: setting limit, paginating with after, using group_by for research mode, and mentions premium cost.

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