vk_wall_get_comment

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

The description discloses it is a read operation with 'Access level: read', which is sufficient for a simple retrieval. However, no annotations are present, and the description does not cover potential errors or rate limits, leaving some gaps.

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 includes redundant metadata (VK API method, tool name, section) that could be omitted. It is reasonably concise but not optimally front-loaded.

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 read tool, the description covers the basic purpose and indicates it returns a single comment. However, it does not clarify optional parameters like owner_id or the return structure, leaving some completeness gaps.

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 only 50% (2 of 4 parameters have descriptions). The description does not elaborate on the undocumented 'extended' and 'fields' parameters, failing to compensate for missing schema info.

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 comment on a wall post, specifying the resource and action. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like vk_wall_get_comments which returns multiple comments.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives is provided. The description only explains what it does, not context or exclusions.

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