Find Reddit users by username or display name to retrieve their profile details, including display name, description, and profile URL.
Find Reddit users by username or display name. Returns username, display name, description, and profile URL.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| after | No | Pagination cursor from previous nextPageUrl (e.g. "t3_...") | |
| limit | No | Number of results to return (1–100) | |
| query | Yes | Username or display name to search for |
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 carries the full burden. It usefully discloses the shape of the result (username, display name, description, profile URL), which confirms it is a read operation, but it says nothing about match semantics (prefix vs fuzzy), result ordering, or pagination behavior despite the cursor parameter.
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 sentences, front-loaded with the action and followed by the return shape. Nothing is redundant or padded relative to the schema.
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?
The listed return fields compensate for the absent output schema, and the parameters are fully documented structurally. However, for a search tool with pagination and an adjacent exact-lookup tool, the description leaves the agent guessing about match behavior and when to prefer this over get_user_profile.
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 the schema already documents all three parameters including the 1–100 limit and the cursor semantics. The description adds only that the query matches username or display name, which is a marginal increment over the schema; baseline 3 is arguably earned but the addition is thin, so a 2 reflects that this dimension is essentially fully carried by the schema.
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 ("Find Reddit users") and specifies the search keys (username or display name), which lets an agent distinguish it from get_user_profile's exact lookup. It stops short of explicitly naming the sibling it differs from, so it lands 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?
There is no when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance. With siblings like get_user_profile and the generic search tool present, the agent must infer that this tool is for partial-name discovery rather than exact profile retrieval, and nothing in the description states or excludes that.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.