vk_wall_post

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. While 'Publish' implies a write/mutation operation, it doesn't specify critical behaviors: whether this requires specific permissions, rate limits, whether posts are editable/deletable after creation, or what happens on success/failure. The description is minimal and lacks operational context.

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 extremely concise - a single sentence with no wasted words. It's front-loaded with the core purpose and uses clear, direct language. Every word earns its place in this minimal but complete statement of function.

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 mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is inadequate. It doesn't explain what happens after posting (e.g., returns a post ID, success status), error conditions, authentication requirements, or how it fits within the VK API ecosystem alongside its siblings. The minimal description leaves too many operational questions unanswered.

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 schema has 100% description coverage, so all parameters are documented in the structured schema. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what's already in the schema (owner_id, message, from_group). This meets the baseline expectation when schema coverage is complete.

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') and resource ('a new post on a wall'), making the tool's purpose immediately understandable. However, it doesn't differentiate this tool from its sibling 'vk_wall_get' (which retrieves posts) or 'vk_wall_create_comment' (which adds comments), missing an opportunity for clearer distinction in the VK API context.

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. There's no mention of prerequisites (like authentication needs), when not to use it, or how it differs from related tools like 'vk_wall_create_comment' for commenting or 'vk_wall_get' for reading posts.

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