Post

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

Adds substantial context beyond annotations: it discloses that the call may consume paid API credits, that confirm=true is mandatory, and clarifies that the read-like POST does not publish to social platforms, justifying the readOnlyHint=false annotation rather than merely restating it.

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?

Front-loaded with purpose and return fields, then a short second block for the credit/confirm caveat. Dense but every sentence carries information; the enumerated return-field list is slightly long yet useful in the absence of an output 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?

With no output schema, the description compensates by naming the returned fields (selftext, title, author, subreddit, score, upvote ratio, comment count, timestamps, permalink, flags). Combined with URL format and credit/confirm requirements, an agent has everything needed to invoke it correctly.

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%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds real value: it specifies accepted URL formats for 'url' and explains the credit-consuming semantics behind 'confirm'. The 'account' parameter's credential-selection meaning is left entirely to 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?

States a specific verb+resource+scope: 'Retrieves public Reddit post details by URL without fetching or returning comments.' The explicit exclusion of comments distinguishes it cleanly from siblings like reddit_post_comments and reddit_post_comments_post.

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?

Clear context is given (single post lookup by URL, excludes comments, accepts canonical and mobile share URLs), which implicitly routes comment-seeking agents to reddit_post_comments. It never names that alternative or states explicit when-not-to-use conditions, so it stops short of a 5.

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