get_posts_commentsposts/comments Group: Posts. Billing per call: 1 Credits.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| sort | No | - Sort by - Default: `CONFIDENCE` - Choose one of the values below - `confidence`: Best - `top`: Top - `new`: New - `controversial`: Controversial - `old`: Old - `qa`: Q&A | |
| postId | No | - Required: true - The `postId` can be retrieved from /posts/search-posts (data->id) - Ex: `t3_178zwq0` |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does not state whether this is a read operation, what it returns, or any rate limits or auth requirements. The billing note is a cost context, not a behavioral trait.
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 extremely brief but under-specified. It does not earn its length as conciseness; it lacks substantive content that would help an agent, resembling an under-specified placeholder rather than a concise, informative description.
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 tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description is severely incomplete. It does not explain what the tool does, how it behaves, or why an agent would need it, despite the schema covering parameters. The description fails to provide essential context for invocation.
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 provides 100% coverage with detailed descriptions for both parameters (sort and postId), including defaults and examples. The description itself adds no parameter information, but the schema already does the heavy lifting, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.
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 restates the title 'posts/comments' and adds only grouping and billing details. It lacks a verb or explanation that this tool retrieves comments for a post, so it is essentially a tautology.
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?
No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus sibling tools like get_subreddit_comments or get_search_comments. The description only mentions group and billing, with no context for appropriate usage.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Several tools are easily confused: get_posts_comments, get_subreddit_comments, and get_search_comments all involve comments but target different scopes; similarly, get_subreddit_search, get_posts_search_posts, and get_search_* tools overlap in search functionality. Without detailed descriptions, an agent might select the wrong endpoint for a given intent.
All tools start with 'get_', providing a consistent verb prefix. However, the structure after the prefix varies: some use entity-first (get_subreddit_comments), some action-first (get_search_comments), and one is awkward (get_posts_search_posts). This mixed pattern reduces predictability.
Ten tools is a reasonable and well-scoped number for a Reddit read-only API server. It covers search across multiple entities and basic content retrieval without feeling bloated or too sparse.
The tool surface is heavily read-focused, covering search and content fetch, but omits many core Reddit operations such as creating posts, commenting, voting, or retrieving user profiles and subreddit details. Some endpoints like get_subreddit_awarding_totals seem niche, while more common ones (e.g., get_subreddit_info) are absent.