get_subreddit_controversialSubreddit Posts > Controversial Group: Subreddit Posts. Billing per call: 1 Credits.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| t | No | ||
| show | No | ||
| after | No | ||
| count | No | ||
| limit | No | ||
| before | No | ||
| sr_detail | No | ||
| subreddit | No |
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?
There are no annotations, and the description provides no behavioral information. It doesn't mention parameters like 't' for time range, authentication requirements, rate limits, or what happens with invalid subreddits. The agent is left completely in the dark about side effects or data fetching behavior.
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 short but does not earn its place; it only repeats the title and billing. It's not structured, lacks front-loading of key info, and is essentially a placeholder rather than a concise 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?
Given the complexity of 8 parameters and no output schema or annotations, the description is completely inadequate. It fails to explain what the tool returns, how to specify the subreddit (though a 'subreddit' parameter exists), or how pagination works. The tool is unusable based on this description.
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?
With 8 parameters at 0% schema description coverage, the description must compensate, but it provides no parameter explanations. The schema only shows names like 't', 'show', 'after', which are cryptic. The description adds zero value for understanding parameters like 'limit' or 'before'.
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 simply repeats the title 'Subreddit Posts > Controversial' and adds billing info, which is not a clear statement of what the tool does. It implies retrieving controversial posts from a subreddit but lacks a specific verb-resource description. The title and group hint at the purpose, but the description itself is tautological.
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 given on when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_subreddit_top or get_controversial. The description does not mention sorting by time period or any usage context. It only states the billing, which is irrelevant.
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.
Each tool targets a distinct resource and action combination (e.g., get_hot vs get_subreddit_hot vs get_user_posts). The scope is clearly delineated by prefixes like 'get_subreddit' and 'get_user', making it easy for an agent to pick the right tool.
All tools follow the consistent 'get_<resource>_<modifier>' pattern using snake_case. Even get_by_id fits the general get_ prefix style. The naming is uniform and predictable across 31 tools.
With 31 tools, the count exceeds the 25+ threshold considered too many. While Reddit has many read endpoints, this server covers only GET operations and still feels bloated, especially with multiple near-duplicate sort variants. It could be consolidated.
The tool surface is entirely read-only (only get_* operations). For a Reddit integration, obvious write operations like posting, commenting, voting, and moderation actions are missing. This creates significant gaps for many use cases and limits the server to exploration only.