vk_groups_get_requests

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

The description mentions 'Access level: read' but lacks other behavioral details such as pagination behavior (offset/count), error handling, or rate limits. Given the absence of annotations, more transparency is needed.

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 meta-information like the VK API method name and section. It is not as efficient as it could be, though it front-loads the primary 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?

Without an output schema, the description should explain the return format (e.g., list of user IDs). It also fails to connect parameters to use cases or provide examples, making it incomplete for a list retrieval 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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already explains each parameter. The description adds no additional parameter-level context, which is acceptable but does not improve understanding beyond the schema.

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 it returns a list of requests to the community, and identifies the VK API method and access level. It is specific enough to avoid confusion with sibling tools like vk_groups_get_members, though the exact nature of 'requests' could be more explicit.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description does not mention prerequisites, limitations, or context for using this tool among the many similar group-related tools.

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