vk_friends_get_app_users

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

With no annotations, the description partially carries the burden. It explicitly states 'Access level: read,' indicating a safe, non-destructive operation. However, it does not mention rate limits or that the result depends on the current user, though 'current user' is implied.

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 with four sentences, but includes redundant repetition of tool and method names. It could be shortened to one or two sentences without losing clarity, but it remains compact and front-loaded with the core purpose.

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?

The tool is simple (no parameters, no output schema). The description specifies the return value (list of IDs) and references the VK API method. It is complete enough for an agent to understand what it does, though it omits details like pagination or format of the IDs.

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 tool has no parameters, and schema coverage is 100%. The description does not need to add parameter details; it implicitly explains that no input is required (operates on current user). This meets the baseline for zero-parameter tools.

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 returns a list of IDs of friends who installed the application. The verb 'Returns' and specific resource 'friends who installed the application' provide a precise purpose, distinguishing it from other vk_friends_* tools that focus on different friend subsets.

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 lacks explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like vk_friends_get or vk_friends_get_mutual. The context (tool name and method) implies it's for app users, but no when-not or alternative recommendations are provided.

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