get_user_posts

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full disclosure burden. It usefully lists the returned fields (titles, scores, subreddits, timestamps) in lieu of an output schema, but says nothing about pagination semantics despite an 'after' cursor parameter, no result caps beyond the schema, no rate-limit or auth expectations, and no note that this is a read-only call.

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?

Three short sentences with no waste: purpose first, then return payload, then use case. The ordering is front-loaded and every sentence contributes distinct 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 4-parameter read tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description covers purpose and return fields, which is the most important gap it could fill. However, pagination behavior and sort defaults remain undisclosed anywhere outside the schema, leaving the definition adequate but not complete.

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 sort, after, limit, and username are already documented in the input schema. The description adds no parameter-level meaning such as a default sort order or how the pagination cursor chains across pages. Baseline 3 is appropriate when the schema does the work.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: 'Get all posts submitted by a Reddit user.' The phrase 'submitted by a Reddit user' implicitly separates it from get_community_posts and get_user_comments, so an agent can pick correctly without opening schemas. It stops short of explicitly naming those siblings, which keeps it at 4 rather than 5.

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?

'Useful for profiling an account's posting behavior' gives a positive use case, so usage is implied rather than left blank. There is no when-not guidance, no mention of when to prefer get_user_comments, get_user_profile, or search, and no note about behavior for nonexistent or suspended accounts.

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