reddit_search_media

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.