Read GW1 wiki page

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the burden. It discloses that it returns extracted text, links, categories, and revision metadata, and notably strips editor usernames. This adds meaningful behavioral context, though it omits error handling or redirect behavior. Still, for a read-only fetch, it is fairly transparent.

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, front-loaded sentence that efficiently conveys the action, target, and output. No wasted words, and it is easy to parse.

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 simple fetch tool, the description covers the core functionality but lacks parameter semantics (especially the source enum and maxCharacters limit) and does not mention failure modes or output format details. Given the absence of annotations and output schema, it is adequate but not fully complete.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate by explaining parameters. It does not mention 'title', 'source', or 'maxCharacters' at all, leaving the enum values (gww, pvx, scr) and character limit unexplained. The parameter names and schema offer some hints, but the description adds no value beyond them.

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 tool fetches a page from Guild Wars Wiki or PvXwiki and returns extracted text, links, categories, and revision metadata. This is a specific verb-resource combination that distinguishes it from sibling tools like search or recent changes.

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 implies usage: use when you need page content from these wikis. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it (e.g., use gw1_wiki_search to find pages first) or mention alternatives. Clear context but no exclusions, so a 4.

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