reddit_post

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive/open-world, so safety is covered. The description adds genuinely new behavioral context beyond annotations: the count is a hard budget and results are not a complete or unbiased survey, warning the agent about sampling limits.

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?

Three tight sentences with the core purpose front-loaded and no filler. Each sentence carries distinct information: what is read, the budget caveat, and the continuation path.

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 usefully enumerates what comes back (links, parent IDs, coverage, next_links). The main gap is the undocumented parameters, but for a read-only retrieval tool the behavioral picture is otherwise complete.

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 0% across 4 parameters, so the description must compensate, and it largely does not. It alludes to maxComments via 'the count is a hard budget' but never explains url, sort, or maxDepth, leaving the agent to infer all parameter meaning from bare schema types.

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 (read) and resource (a Reddit post and its loaded comments), plus the shape of the return (original links, parent IDs, coverage). It implicitly distinguishes itself from reddit_search by fetching a single post rather than searching, though it never names the siblings explicitly.

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 closing line 'Follow next_links for more threads' gives real continuation guidance for paginating, and the budget caveat implies when results are partial. However, it never states when to prefer this over reddit_search or x_post, leaving alternative selection to inference.

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