vk_post_teams_68a82e0c7e06

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses the toggle behavior, the raw proxy nature, the optional body parameter, top-level parameter passing, alias acceptance, and authentication requirement. This is rich behavioral context beyond any structured data.

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 front-loaded with the purpose and contains seven sentences, each providing a distinct piece of information. It is not overly verbose, though some redundancy exists between the toggle statement and the endpoint mapping.

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 has five parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description covers purpose, behavior, endpoint, body usage, parameter aliases, and authentication. It does not mention response details or permission requirements, but it is still fairly complete for a raw proxy tool.

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%, so baseline is 3. The description adds extra meaning by explaining that path/query parameters are top-level fields, that aliases are accepted, and that the body is optional and may carry payloads even when schema omits them. This justifies a 4.

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 opens with 'Toggle a team member's admin status,' which uses a specific verb and resource. It also names the exact REST endpoint, clearly distinguishing this tool from the many other vk_post_* siblings.

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 clearly implies when to use this tool (to toggle admin status) and explains the toggle behavior. It does not explicitly list alternatives or exclusions, but the raw proxy nature and specific endpoint make the usage context clear.

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