Get subreddit info

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the tool's safety profile is established. The description adds useful context about the kind of information returned, but does not disclose further behavioral details such as output format, pagination, or rate limits. This is acceptable given the annotations, but not notably rich.

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 with no filler. The first sentence front-loads the core output, and the second sentence justifies the tool's purpose with a concrete example. Every sentence earns its place.

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 single-parameter, read-only tool, the description is largely complete: it names the community scope, the returned information categories, and a realistic use case. Since there is no output schema, describing the high-level return contents as 'size, age, activity, and description' is sufficient, though exact structure is not specified.

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?

The input schema has 100% description coverage for the single parameter, including 'Community name, with or without the r/ prefix.' The tool description adds no additional parameter-specific guidance, so it meets the baseline without exceeding it.

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 identifies the tool as providing 'size, age, activity, and description of one community,' which is specific and distinct from sibling tools focused on content, rules, or user activity. The verb is implied by the title 'Get subreddit info,' but the description elaborates the resource and its unique data categories well.

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?

The description provides a concrete use case: 'Use it to weigh a finding,' explaining how community scale affects interpretation. It gives clear context for when this tool is valuable, though it does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use it.

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