Retrieve subreddit metadata like description, subscriber count, active users, creation date, and NSFW flag to evaluate or describe a community before engaging with it.
Get metadata about a subreddit: description, subscriber count, active users, creation date, NSFW flag, icon, and banner. Use to evaluate or describe a community.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| subreddit | Yes | Subreddit name (without r/ prefix) |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It usefully discloses what data is returned and implies a read-only lookup, but says nothing about auth requirements, behavior for private/banned/nonexistent subreddits, or rate limits. For a simple read tool this is acceptable 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.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Two tight sentences: the first front-loads what is returned, the second gives the use case. Every clause earns its place with no redundant restatement of the tool name.
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 single-parameter read tool with no output schema, enumerating the returned fields is exactly the right compensation. Only edge-case behavior (invalid or private subreddit handling) is left unstated, a minor gap.
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?
With only one parameter at 100% schema description coverage, the schema already documents the 'subreddit' argument and its format requirement (no r/ prefix). The description adds no additional meaning about the parameter, so the baseline of 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?
The description opens with a specific verb and resource ('Get metadata about a subreddit') and enumerates the fields returned (description, subscriber count, active users, creation date, NSFW flag, icon, banner), making the purpose unambiguous. It is clearly distinct from siblings like get_community_posts or search_communities by virtue of being metadata-only, though it never names those siblings explicitly.
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?
'Use to evaluate or describe a community' gives a contextual hint for when the tool is appropriate, but there are no exclusions or named alternatives (e.g., use get_community_posts for content, search_communities for discovery). Usage is therefore implied rather than specified.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.