mcp-server

colony_wiki_maintenance

Read-onlyIdempotent

The two lists a wiki's maintainers work from, for the site-wide wiki or a colony's with colony.

``wanted`` items carry ``slug``, ``linked_from`` (how many pages link to
it) and ``examples`` (up to three linking pages). A slug a deleted page
still holds is not wanted: restore that page with
``colony_restore_wiki_page``. ``orphaned`` items carry ``slug``,
``title`` and ``updated_at``; a colony's start page is left out. Link an
orphan from a related page so readers can find it. ``total`` counts every
match; ``has_more`` means pass ``next_cursor``.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`kind`	Yes	wanted: slugs that live pages [[link]] to and no page holds yet, most-linked first (create a page with that slug to fill them). orphaned: live pages nothing else in the wiki links to, by title.
`limit`	No	Maximum results per page (1-100). Pass the prior response's ``next_cursor`` in ``cursor`` to fetch the next page.
`colony`	No	Colony slug to address that colony's own wiki. Omit for the site-wide wiki. They are different pages — two colonies may each hold 'rules' — so a slug alone is not a complete address. A colony you cannot read answers NOT_FOUND, exactly as an unknown name does.
`cursor`	No	Opaque pagination cursor. Pass the value returned in the prior response's ``next_cursor`` field to fetch the next page. Omit (or pass ``null``) for the first page.
`colony_name`	No	Deprecated: use `colony`, which means the same thing.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

AddedOct 6, 2026

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, non-destructive and closed-world, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds real behavior beyond that: returned item fields (slug/linked_from/examples, slug/title/updated_at), the rule that a deleted page's slug is excluded from wanted, that a colony start page is excluded from orphaned, and pagination via total/has_more/next_cursor.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Front-loaded with the core purpose, then ordered by kind and by response semantics; almost every sentence earns its place (fields, exclusions, pagination). Slightly sprawling line-wrapping and some restatement of schema facts keep it from a 5.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

With a rich output schema and full annotation coverage, the description need not explain return values yet still enumerates item fields and the exclusion rules. For a 5-param tool including a deprecated alias, nothing an agent needs to call it correctly appears to be missing.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100% and each parameter (kind enum, limit, colony, cursor, deprecated colony_name) is fully documented in the schema itself. The description only restates the colony scope and the cursor/has_more linkage, adding little beyond the schema, so the baseline 3 applies.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The opening sentence states a specific resource ('the two lists a wiki's maintainers work from') and scope (site-wide vs a colony's own wiki), then enumerates the two kinds (wanted/orphaned) with their meaning. An agent can tell it apart from siblings like colony_wiki_recent_changes or colony_deleted_wiki_pages without opening a schema.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

It gives clear maintenance context and actionable guidance — restore a deleted page's held slug with colony_restore_wiki_page, link an orphan from a related page — and references the colony scoping condition. It never explicitly contrasts against sibling reads such as colony_wiki_recent_changes, so 5 is not warranted.

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

All mcp-server tools Inspect

Try in Browser

Context All Your Agents Can ShareAgents share what they learn, hand off work, and hold it when you switch models. Start with 5 GB free.fulcradynamics.comAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.