Subreddit Posts

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

Annotations mark readOnlyHint=false and openWorldHint=true, and the description helpfully explains the apparent tension: it discloses that the call is credit-consuming, requires confirm=true, and clarifies that read-like POSTs don't publish to social platforms. It also enumerates returned fields, adding real context beyond the annotations, though it omits caching interaction detail that the schema parameter hints at.

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 purpose is front-loaded in the first sentence, and the credit/confirm warning is appropriately placed. The long field enumeration is slightly dense but earns its place given there is no 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?

For an 8-parameter, credit-consuming tool with no output schema, the description covers the return fields, the confirm requirement, and the read-like POST semantics. It could say more about the caching/credit tradeoff, but it is otherwise sufficient to call 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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents each parameter (sort enum, timeframe enum, after token, trim, confirm, account, cache_max_age). The description restates sort/timeframe/pagination/trim without adding format or interaction semantics beyond the schema, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 ('Fetches posts from a subreddit') with scope (sorting/filtering), so the agent knows exactly what it returns. It does not differentiate from siblings like reddit_search or reddit_subreddit_search, which also surface Reddit content, so it falls short of a 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?

Usage is implied by the resource name (fetch posts for a given subreddit) and the description notes available sort/timeframe options. However, it never says when to prefer this over reddit_search, reddit_subreddit_search, or reddit_post, leaving selection to inference.

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