resolve_url_type

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

No annotations exist, so the description must carry the behavioral load. It does disclose the output shape (detected type plus extracted identifiers such as post ID, username, subreddit), but says nothing about what happens for non-Reddit or malformed URLs, whether any network call occurs, or whether detection is purely local string parsing.

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, outcome and enumeration front-loaded, with the usage hint last. Nothing is repeated from the schema and no sentence is filler.

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 classifier with no output schema, the description adequately covers both input expectations and return content. The one gap is failure behavior for unsupported URLs, which an agent would want to know before branching on the result.

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 coverage is 100% and the single parameter is already documented as 'Any Reddit URL to classify.' The description still adds real meaning by implying the full breadth of accepted URL forms (post, comment, profile, subreddit, search links), which tells the agent it need not normalize input first.

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 ('Detect') and resource ('a Reddit URL'), then enumerates the exact classes it can resolve — post, comment, user profile, subreddit, search — and names the return payload. This clearly separates it from the retrieval siblings like get_post or get_user_profile.

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?

Gives the operative context: 'Useful before deciding which tool to call next,' which frames it as a routing/dispatch step ahead of the other tools. It stops short of naming specific alternatives or stating when-not to use it (e.g. that it isn't needed if you already know the type or have a post ID).

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