vrchat_event_follow

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

The description indicates a mutation action ('follow/unfollow') which is consistent with the annotation readOnlyHint=false, but it adds no additional behavioral context such as idempotency, error conditions, or authorization requirements beyond what the annotations already imply.

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 a single, clear sentence with no unnecessary words. However, it is so concise that it omits useful detail, which slightly reduces its effectiveness despite efficient wording.

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 three required parameters, no schema descriptions, and an output schema that is not detailed, the description lacks essential context such as the effect of isFollowing, success/failure responses, and prerequisites. The agent would likely need to infer or test behavior.

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 description does not explain the meaning or format of any parameter (groupId, calendarId, isFollowing). With 0% schema description coverage, the description fails to compensate, leaving the agent to infer usage from parameter names alone.

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 clearly states the verb 'Follow or unfollow' and the resource 'group calendar event', which is distinct from other event-related sibling tools like create, update, delete, or get.

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, prerequisites (e.g., group membership), or how this tool relates to alternatives like event creation or deletion. The description is purely declarative.

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