vk_groups_get_by_id

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It only states the tool returns information, but doesn't mention that it is a read-only operation, any authentication needs, rate limits, or error handling (e.g., invalid IDs). The description is insufficient to ensure correct invocation.

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 with 7 words, no fluff. It front-loads the core purpose. Every word is necessary and earns its place. It is highly concise.

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 simplicity of the tool and the presence of sibling tools, the description is minimally adequate. However, it lacks details about return values (no output schema), handling of multiple IDs vs single ID, and any constraints. For a complete understanding, the agent would need to infer from the schema.

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?

Input schema has 3 parameters with descriptions, and coverage is 100%. The description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema provides (e.g., it mentions 'by their IDs' but doesn't explain the 'fields' parameter or the difference between group_ids and group_id). Baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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?

Description clearly states the tool returns information about communities by their IDs. It distinguishes from siblings like vk_groups_get and vk_groups_search, which have different purposes. The verb 'returns' and resource 'information about communities' are specific and unambiguous.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives. The description implies usage for looking up groups by ID, but doesn't mention when not to use it (e.g., for searching or listing groups). The context of sibling tools is present, but the description alone provides no usage differentiation.

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