vk_wall_get

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states 'Get posts' which implies a read-only operation, but doesn't specify authentication requirements, rate limits, pagination behavior (beyond the offset parameter), or what the return format looks like. For a tool with 4 parameters and no output schema, this leaves significant gaps in understanding how it behaves.

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, efficient sentence that directly states the tool's purpose without unnecessary words. It's front-loaded with the core action and resource, making it easy to parse quickly. Every word earns its place, with no redundancy or fluff.

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 tool's complexity (4 parameters, no annotations, no output schema), the description is incomplete. It doesn't address key contextual aspects like authentication needs, error handling, return format, or how it differs from sibling tools. For a data retrieval tool in a social media API context, more guidance is needed to ensure proper usage.

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 adds minimal semantic context beyond the input schema, which has 100% coverage with clear descriptions for all 4 parameters. It implies the tool retrieves posts from walls, aligning with parameters like 'owner_id' and 'domain', but doesn't explain relationships between parameters (e.g., using 'owner_id' vs. 'domain') or provide usage examples. Baseline 3 is appropriate given the high schema coverage.

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 ('Get posts') and resource ('from a user or community wall'), making the purpose immediately understandable. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate this tool from sibling tools like 'vk_newsfeed_get' or 'vk_wall_post', which might also involve retrieving content from walls or similar sources.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention sibling tools like 'vk_newsfeed_get' (which might get posts from a newsfeed) or 'vk_wall_post' (which posts to a wall), leaving the agent without context for tool selection. There's no indication of prerequisites or exclusions.

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