vk_wall_get_by_id

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 notes 'Access level: read,' indicating no destructive side effects. However, it does not disclose rate limits, potential errors, or the behavior of the copy_history_depth parameter. The read access hint is minimal additional context.

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 (three sentences). The first sentence efficiently conveys purpose. The second and third sentences repeat metadata (VK API method, tool name, section) that is likely redundant or obvious from the tool name and context. It could be more concise by omitting redundant details.

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 absence of an output schema and annotations, the description should provide more context about return format, common use cases, or error scenarios. It covers basic purpose and access level but lacks deeper context needed for a tool with multiple parameters and no output 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?

Schema description coverage is 75% (3 of 4 parameters described), so baseline is 3. The description does not add any parameter details beyond the schema. The schema already explains the 'posts' format and 'extended'/'copy_history_depth' purposes. The description adds no additional semantic value.

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 'Returns a list of posts from user or community walls by their IDs.' This specifies the action (returns), resource (posts from walls), and method (by IDs), distinguishing it from siblings like vk_wall_get (which likely retrieves posts without specific IDs) and vk_wall_search.

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 does not mention when not to use it, prerequisites, or compare with siblings like vk_wall_get or vk_wall_search. The agent must infer usage context entirely.

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