vk_post_shares_5d6ccf52a1d9

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It states that authentication is not required, explains parameter passing (path/query params as top-level fields), and mentions camelCase/snake_case aliases. These are useful details beyond the schema, though it does not describe all possible side effects or response details.

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 concise and front-loaded with the main purpose. Each sentence adds new information: the purpose, the REST endpoint, the request payload, parameter conventions, and authentication requirement. No redundant text.

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 simple proxy tool with two parameters and no output schema, the description covers purpose, input handling, authentication requirement, and naming conventions. It is sufficiently complete for an agent to invoke the tool correctly without additional assumptions.

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 description coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining the body field as the JSON request payload, clarifying that path and query parameters are top-level, and noting aliases. This goes beyond the schema's own descriptions.

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's function: 'Get an auth token for a share' and 'Get a jwt auth token for a shared project from a share hash.' It is specific about the verb, resource, and purpose, and the reference to the REST endpoint distinguishes it from sibling tools.

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 clear context on when to use the tool (given a share hash) and notes that authentication is not required. It does not explicitly name alternative tools or conditions when not to use, so it stops short of a 5.

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