vrchat_groups_search

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

The description includes "(read-only)" which aligns with the annotation readOnlyHint=true. It adds that search is by name or shortCode, but no further behavioral traits (e.g., rate limits, result ordering, exact vs. partial matching) are disclosed. With annotations covering the safety profile, this is adequate but not rich.

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 states purpose and constrains search criteria. It is very concise, but could include brief usage guidance without becoming verbose. The structure is effective for minimal information.

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 4 parameters, a required query, and an output schema, the description covers only the basic search functionality. It lacks details on search behavior (fuzzy vs. exact, case sensitivity), pagination mechanics, and how results relate to the output schema. The output schema may exist but the description does not leverage it for completeness.

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%, so the description must compensate. It explains the query parameter implicitly (search by name or shortCode), but provides no meaning for maxItems, maxPages, or pageSize. These parameters relate to pagination and result limits, but the description ignores them, leaving agents to infer from 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 action (Search) and the resource (groups) with specific search criteria (by name or shortCode). It also notes the tool is read-only, distinguishing it from mutation tools. Sibling tools like vrchat_group_profile and vrchat_group_members have different purposes, so this tool is well-defined.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. Sibling tools like vrchat_group_profile (for a known group) or vrchat_group_events_list (for events) exist, but the description doesn't advise when to choose this search tool over them. No exclusion criteria or use cases are mentioned.

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