Publish a post

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

Annotations indicate readOnlyHint=false (mutation), destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=false. The description adds value by explaining idempotency prevention via 'guid' parameter, the behavior of posting on behalf of community vs personal, and the return value (new post_id). No contradictions 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?

The description is three sentences, front-loaded with the main action. Each sentence provides essential guidance without redundancy. No wasted words.

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 complexity (6 parameters, 1 required) and presence of an output schema, the description covers key scenarios: community vs personal posting, attachment handling, scheduling. Returns important info (post_id). Rate limits or permissions are not discussed, but annotations and context signals (destructiveHint=false) partially address safety. Overall complete for selection and invocation.

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 100% with descriptions for all 6 parameters. The description adds critical semantic context: the meaning of negative owner_id with from_group, the source of attachment strings (vk_photos_upload_wall), and the scheduling constraint (publish_date within 2 weeks via schema). This goes beyond raw schema definitions.

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 ('Publish a post on a wall') and specifies the resource ('a wall'). It distinguishes from siblings like vk_wall_get, vk_wall_delete, vk_wall_edit, vk_wall_create_comment by focusing on posting. Additional details on community vs personal posting further clarify scope.

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 explicit guidance for posting in a community (owner_id with minus sign and from_group true) and for attaching media via vk_photos_upload_wall. It does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives, but the context is sufficient for typical use cases. Lacks explicit 'when-not-to-use' but still strong.

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