Retrieve a ranked leaderboard of trending and fast-growing Reddit communities with subscriber counts and growth metrics; paginate results to explore more communities.
Get a leaderboard of trending and fast-growing Reddit communities. Returns subreddit names, subscriber counts, and growth metrics.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| after | No | Pagination cursor from previous nextPageUrl (e.g. "t3_...") | |
| limit | No | Number of results to return (1–100) |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations exist, so the description must carry the behavioral burden, and it does give partial value by disclosing the return payload shape (names, subscriber counts, growth metrics). However, it omits ranking/ordering logic for the leaderboard, whether results are paginated by cursor in practice beyond the schema hint, and any auth or rate-limit constraints, leaving meaningful behavioral gaps.
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 with zero filler, front-loading the resource and following with the return contents. Every sentence earns its place by contributing either purpose or output information.
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 read-only, two-parameter listing tool with full schema coverage, the description covers purpose and return values adequately, and no output schema is needed given the explicit field list. The only gap is the absence of sibling differentiation and any note on result ordering, which are minor for this complexity level.
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%, with both 'after' and 'limit' fully documented in the schema including ranges and cursor format, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no additional meaning about pagination or limit semantics beyond what the schema already supplies.
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 names a specific verb and resource ('Get a leaderboard of trending and fast-growing Reddit communities') and enumerates the returned fields (subreddit names, subscriber counts, growth metrics), so the agent knows exactly what the tool produces. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from close siblings like get_popular or explore, which also surface community listings, leaving some ambiguity for selection.
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?
Usage is only implied: 'trending and fast-growing' suggests discovery-oriented browsing, but the description never states when to prefer this over get_popular, explore, or search_communities. No prerequisites, exclusions, or alternative-routing guidance is provided, so the agent must infer the choice from the name alone.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.