reddit_update_profile

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

With no annotations provided, the description bears full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It mentions 'human-mimetic typing' which hints at stealthy behavior, but does not disclose authentication requirements, side effects on unlisted fields, rate limits, or what happens on success/failure. As a mutation tool, this lack of transparency is a significant gap.

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, focused sentence that front-loads the purpose and lists affected fields, with the 'human-mimetic' detail added without bloat. Every word earns its place, and it is appropriately sized for the tool's simplicity.

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 update tool with no output schema, the description covers the essential action and fields. However, it omits return value/error handling, authentication expectations, and whether all parameters are optional (though schema shows required: []). These gaps are notable given the absence of annotations, but the operation is simple enough that the description is minimally viable.

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 100%, so each parameter (bio, is_nsfw, display_name) is already documented. The tool description only repeats these field names without adding syntax, constraints, or behavioral nuances. This meets the baseline of 3 for high schema coverage.

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 action ('Update own profile settings') and enumerates the specific fields affected: display name, bio description, and NSFW flag. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like reddit_get_profile (read-only) and reddit_submit_post/comment (content creation), making the tool's purpose unambiguous.

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 usage for updating profile settings, but does not explicitly state when to use it over alternatives. There is no mention of exclusions or when not to use it (e.g., for reading profile data). The 'own' qualifier and the listed fields give context, but no explicit routing to siblings.

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