Community statistics

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false. The description adds the crucial behavioral detail that admin privileges are required, which is not captured in annotations. There is no contradiction with annotations.

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?

Two sentences are used: the first states the core purpose, the second adds a critical usage condition. No filler words; highly efficient and front-loaded.

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 read-oriented tool with an output schema, the description adequately covers what the tool does (reads statistics by period), the types of data (reach, visitors, activity), and the prerequisite (admin status). No additional behavioral details are needed given the annotations.

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 coverage is 67% with descriptions for group_id and intervals_count. The description mentions 'by period: reach, visitors and activity' but does not elaborate on parameter syntax, formats, or constraints beyond what the schema provides. It adds marginal value.

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 tool reads community statistics (reach, visitors, activity) by period. It uses a specific verb ('Read') and resource ('community statistics'), and is distinct from sibling tools like vk_wall_get or vk_users_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?

The description provides necessary context: the token owner must be an administrator of the community. It does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or suggest alternatives among siblings, but the given condition is clear and actionable.

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