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

With no annotations, the description must stand alone. It mentions 'Title discarded after the call' but does not disclose other behaviors like read-only nature, network usage, or error handling, leaving the agent with minimal information.

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 extremely concise, with two short sentences, and front-loads the primary purpose. No wasted words or irrelevant info are present.

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?

The description fails to explain how to use the tool given the 9 irrelevant parameters, lacks a return value specification, and omits any context about the actual input for the title. It is incomplete even for a simple existence check.

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 schema properties (ref, url, city, feed, host, json, path, zone, query) are completely unrelated to checking a Wikipedia title, and the description does not clarify which parameter (if any) represents the title. The schema descriptions actively mislead (e.g., 'Git ref name' for ref), so the description adds no semantic meaning.

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 verb ('check') and the resource ('Wikipedia title existence'), which is specific and distinguishes it from sibling tools that check other resources.

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, no mention of prerequisite conditions, and no exclusions or use cases.

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