vrchat_group_posts_recent

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

The description adds no behavioral context beyond the readOnlyHint annotation it repeats. It does not disclose pagination behavior, the need to provide either groupId or shortCode, sorting/ordering, or any side effects or prerequisites. With annotations already covering safety, this adds minimal value.

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, front-loaded sentence that captures the essence in under ten words. Every word earns its place; no fluff or unnecessary detail.

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 6 optional parameters and no required ones, the tool has ambiguous invocation requirements. The description does not clarify how to specify the group (groupId vs shortCode) or the pagination parameters, leaving the agent under-informed. Although an output schema exists, the request construction remains unclear.

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%, and the description provides absolutely no explanation of any parameter (groupId, maxItems, maxPages, pageSize, shortCode, publicOnly). The agent is left without guidance on how these optional parameters interact or which combination is required to identify the group.

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 uses a specific verb ('List'), identifies the resource ('recent posts for a group'), and explicitly marks the operation as read-only, clearly distinguishing it from sibling write tools like vrchat_group_post_create/update/delete. It fully conveys what the tool does with no ambiguity.

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 phrase 'read-only' and the focus on 'recent posts' provide clear context for when to use this tool (viewing group posts) and implicitly that it should not be used for mutations. However, it does not name specific alternatives or provide explicit when-not-to-use guidance, just a clear context without exclusions.

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