vk_groups_get_banned

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the burden. It mentions 'Access level: read', indicating no side effects, but does not disclose details about pagination, rate limits, or required permissions. The description is minimal but truthful.

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 short but includes redundant metadata (VK API method, tool name, section) that does not aid tool selection. The core purpose is front-loaded, but the extra lines are wasteful. Could be more concise without loss of meaning.

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 list retrieval tool with 5 parameters and no output schema, the description covers the main purpose but lacks details on response structure, pagination, and parameter usage beyond the schema. It is minimally adequate but not thorough.

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?

With 60% schema description coverage, the description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema. It does not explain the `fields` or `owner_id` parameters, which are undocumented in the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate as the description neither harms nor significantly aids understanding.

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 users on a community blacklist, specifying the verb 'Returns' and the resource 'users on a community blacklist'. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like vk_groups_get_members or vk_groups_get_requests, which deal with other group member lists.

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. It merely states what it does, leaving the agent to infer from context. No explicit when-not or alternative tool mentions.

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