vk-mcp-ru

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

vk_search_methods

Read-only

Search VK API method catalog by keyword in Russian or English. Returns ranked JSON list of matching endpoints for quick integration.

Instructions

Search the endpoint catalog by keyword (works in Russian and English).

Args: query: free text, e.g. "остатки", "stocks", "update price". limit: max results (1-50). Returns JSON list of matching endpoints (best first).

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "query": "<query>"
    },
    "name": "vk_search_methods"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`limit`	No
`query`	Yes

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.2.0Sep 11, 2026

TDQS

A4.6/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful behavioral context: it works in Russian and English, returns a JSON list, and orders results best-first. 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.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is compact and well-structured: a one-sentence purpose followed by a short Args block and a return-format note. There is no filler or repetition of schema information.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a simple search tool with two parameters, read-only annotations, and an output schema, the description is complete. It covers what the tool searches, query language support, argument meaning, result limit, and return format.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters5/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must fully compensate. It does: 'query' is explained as free text with concrete examples, and 'limit' is documented as 'max results (1-50).' Both parameters receive meaningful semantics beyond the bare schema types.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Search the endpoint catalog by keyword.' This directly conveys what the tool does and distinguishes it from sibling tools that list sections or describe individual methods, even without naming them.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description clearly establishes the tool's use case: finding endpoints by keyword, with examples like 'остатки' and 'update price.' It does not explicitly state when not to use it or name alternatives, but the search context is clear enough for an agent to route appropriately.

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

Deploy Server