search_posts

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It only mentions searching by keywords, omitting key behavioral details such as whether authentication is required, how results are sorted, pagination, or any limitations on post visibility (public vs private). The schema implies time range and count, but the description adds no behavioral 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 a single, clear sentence in Russian (8 words) that efficiently states the tool's purpose. There is no extraneous information or redundancy; every word contributes 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?

With 4 parameters (1 required), no output schema, and no annotations, the description is insufficiently complete. It fails to describe return values, sorting, pagination, or any constraints. A more complete description would include result format and usage 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?

The input schema has 100% description coverage, with each parameter explained (q, count, start_time, end_time). The description itself does not add any additional meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 the tool searches posts in VKontakte news feed by keywords. It specifies the verb (search), resource (posts), scope (news feed), and method (keywords). However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like 'get_wall' which retrieves posts from a specific wall, leaving potential 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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'get_wall'. The description only states what it does, with no explicit when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or alternative suggestions. This is a significant gap for agent decision-making.

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