List Redmine project wiki pages

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

The description goes well beyond the annotations by disclosing ordering behavior (title-and-parent order), inclusion of safe browser links, reliance on the view_wiki_pages permission, and potential HTTP 401/403/404 errors. It also explicitly confirms non-mutating behavior, giving the agent a thorough understanding of side effects and failure modes.

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 well organized and information-dense, front-loading the purpose, then covering route characteristics, permissions, and non-mutation. It is slightly long but every sentence contributes value, and the structure is logical.

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 single-parameter read-only tool with an output schema, the description is remarkably complete. It covers purpose, route limitations, output field specifics, permission requirements, expected HTTP errors, and explicitly confirms no data mutation, giving an agent all necessary context to invoke the tool correctly.

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 already documents the project_id parameter with a clear description and 100% coverage. The description repeats this information without adding new meaning, meeting the baseline expected when the schema handles parameter semantics.

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 'read' and the specific resource 'wiki page index' from an explicit API endpoint, distinguishing it from sibling tools that fetch individual pages or versions. It unambiguously communicates what the tool returns.

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 clear context about the tool's scope (no pagination, no filters, limited fields) and its read-only nature, informing when it is appropriate to use. However, it does not explicitly name alternative tools or state exclusion conditions, so it falls short of a 5.

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