vk_photos_get_messages_upload_server

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

No annotations provided, so description must bear full burden. It mentions 'Access level: read' but lacks details on authentication requirements, rate limits, or that this server address is a preparatory step for subsequent upload. Minimal behavioral disclosure.

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?

Description is three sentences, front-loading the main purpose. Includes redundant mention of tool name but is otherwise efficient.

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 preparatory tool, it adequately explains what it does and the required parameter. With no output schema, it could hint at next steps (e.g., use returned address with save method), but the current completeness is sufficient for context.

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 coverage is 100% with a detailed description for 'peer_id'. The tool description adds no extra parameter information beyond the schema, so baseline 3 applies.

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 it returns the server address for photo upload in a private message, specifying the VK API method and access level. It distinguishes from sibling upload server tools (e.g., get_chat_upload_server) by mentioning 'private message'.

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?

Implies usage for private message photo uploads, but provides no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance. Does not compare with alternative upload server tools among siblings.

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