vk_friends_get_requests

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only states the basic function without mentioning authentication requirements, side effects, rate limits, or return format details. The description is too brief to inform the agent about non-obvious behaviors.

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 a single sentence, making it concise and easy to parse. It front-loads the core purpose without unnecessary details, but could be slightly expanded with key context like the user scope or return type without becoming verbose.

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 10 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is insufficiently complete. It does not explain pagination (offset/count), the effect of parameters like 'extended' or 'suggested', or the structure of the response. A complex tool requires more context for correct invocation.

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 input schema has 70% description coverage, so the schema already documents most parameters. The description adds minimal value by summarizing that both incoming and outgoing requests are covered, corresponding to the 'out' parameter. However, it does not elaborate on parameter usage beyond what the schema provides.

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 information about incoming and outgoing friend requests for the current user. It uses specific verb 'Returns' and specifies the resource 'information about friend requests', distinguishing it from sibling tools like vk_friends_get which likely returns the actual friend list.

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 like vk_friends_get_suggestions or vk_friends_get_recent. It does not mention prerequisites, context, or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer usage from the tool name alone.

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