reddit_feedback_get

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and non-destructive, but the description goes well beyond them: it enumerates the possible status values (new, triaged, shipped, declined), discloses the response text field, explains that updated_at only moves when the team acts, states the call is free, and documents the 404 condition when the id is not on this account.

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?

Front-loaded with the core action and tightly packed with useful detail, but the single long parenthetical-laden sentence is dense. Nothing is wasted, though the structure could be easier to scan.

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?

With no output schema, the description carries the burden of explaining return values, and it does so by naming the status values, response text, and updated_at semantics, plus the error case. Nothing an agent needs to call it correctly is missing.

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% and the single id parameter is fully described in the schema, including the 'not a local draft id' caveat. The description restates the same sourcing information, so it adds little beyond what the schema already provides; baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb (check the status) and a specific resource (a feedback report this account sent earlier), and identifies the source of the id via reddit_feedback_send. An agent can distinguish it from reddit_feedback_send and reddit_feedback_list without opening any schema.

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?

Clear context for when it applies: after sending a report, using the server id returned by the 'send' action. It does not explicitly name reddit_feedback_list as the alternative for enumerating reports, so there is no resolved when-to-use-vs-alternative routing.

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