vk_users_get_subscriptions

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It states the access level is 'read', which implies no destructive actions, but it does not disclose other behavioral traits such as pagination behavior, rate limits, or what happens when user_id is omitted (likely defaults to current user). The description adds minimal value beyond the input schema.

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 concise, consisting of two sentences that front-load the main purpose. However, it includes redundant information like the VK API method name, tool name, and section, which could be omitted for brevity without losing 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?

Given the tool has 5 parameters and no output schema, the description could provide more context about the return format, pagination behavior, or practical usage examples. It adequately states the core function but lacks completeness for an agent to fully understand the tool's behavior without relying on external documentation.

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 80% (4 out of 5 parameters have descriptions). The description itself adds no additional context about parameters beyond what the schema already provides. With high coverage, a score of 3 is appropriate as the description does not compensate for any gaps.

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 IDs of users and communities followed by a user. It specifies the VK API method and access level. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like vk_users_get_followers, which also returns followers. The purpose is clear but could be more specific to avoid confusion.

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 such as vk_users_get_followers or vk_groups_get_members. There is no mention of prerequisites, context, or scenarios where this tool is appropriate. The agent gets no help in choosing between similar tools.

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