Read GW1 wiki page

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden and does well by disclosing it returns extracted text, links, categories, revision metadata, and explicitly notes the exclusion of editor usernames. However, it does not mention any potential rate limits, authentication needs, or that it is read-only.

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?

Single sentence of 20 words efficiently conveys purpose, resource, and output structure with no redundancy. Every word earns its place.

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?

Despite no output schema, the description lists key returned fields (text, links, categories, revision metadata, no usernames), providing sufficient context for an agent to understand what the tool provides. Could mention format or structure, but adequate.

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 0%, so description must compensate. It implies the 'title' parameter as the page name and hints at 'source' via 'Guild Wars Wiki or PvXwiki', but does not mention the 'maxCharacters' parameter or explain default values and constraints. It adds meaning beyond schema by describing output details, but not fully compensating for all parameters.

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?

Clearly states the verb 'Fetch', the resource 'a page from Guild Wars Wiki or PvXwiki', and what is returned (extracted text, links, categories, revision metadata without usernames). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like gw1_wiki_search which is for searching pages.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like gw1_wiki_search or gw1_wiki_recent_changes. The usage is implied but not clarified with when-not or alternative recommendations.

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