reddit_browse_user

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the scope of data audited but does not mention whether the operation is read-only, whether authentication is required, what rate limits apply, or what the response contains. The word 'audit' hints at investigation but leaves key behavioral traits undisclosed.

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, front-loaded sentence with no filler. Every word contributes to defining the tool's scope, making it easy to parse quickly.

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 tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description is too sparse. It does not explain return values, pagination, sorting, or the meaning of 'public profile metrics.' An agent would need additional inference or trial-and-error to use 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 description coverage is only 50%: the username parameter is documented in the schema, but limit is not. The description adds no parameter-level meaning, failing to explain how limit behaves or clarify the username format beyond what the schema already states.

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 ('Audit') and identifies the exact resource: another user's submitted posts, comment activity, and public profile metrics. This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like reddit_browse_subreddit (subreddit-level browsing) and reddit_get_profile (profile retrieval).

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?

No guidance is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as reddit_get_profile or reddit_search. The phrase 'another user's' implies it is for viewing other users rather than oneself, but there are no explicit conditions, exclusions, or alternative routing.

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