get_cross_posts

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It mentions output format but lacks details on rate limits, authentication needs, error handling, or whether this is a read-only operation. For a tool with zero annotation coverage, this leaves significant 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?

The description is well-structured with emoji sections and bullet points, making it easy to scan. However, the 'Examples' section could be more concise, and some decorative elements like emojis don't add functional value, slightly reducing efficiency.

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 1-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers purpose and output format adequately but lacks context on behavioral aspects like rate limits or error cases. Given the low complexity, it's minimally complete but could be more informative.

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 100% schema description coverage, the baseline is 3. The description adds value by specifying that post_id is a 'Reddit post ID to find crossposts for' and provides concrete examples, enhancing understanding beyond the schema's basic type information.

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 clearly states the tool's purpose with specific verb ('Find crossposts') and resource ('Reddit post'), distinguishing it from siblings like get_post_comments or get_subreddit_posts by focusing on crosspost relationships rather than comments, subreddit info, or general posts.

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 implied through examples showing post_id usage, but there's no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like search_reddit or get_subreddit_posts for related content. The description doesn't mention prerequisites or exclusions.

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