wiki_list_pages

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries the full burden, and it does disclose the shape of the result set (slug, title, type, status, last_verified, summary). It says nothing about pagination, result caps, or ordering for what could be a large list, and never states plainly that this is a non-mutating read.

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?

Two sentences, zero waste: the first front-loads what is returned, the second front-loads the usage rule. Every clause earns its place, and the field list compensates for the absent output schema.

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 one-optional-parameter, read-only listing tool with no output schema, the description supplies the return fields and the usage ordering, which is most of what an agent needs. The remaining gap is pagination and list-size behavior, which is minor for this complexity.

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 100% and the single page_type parameter is fully documented in the schema with its allowed values, so the baseline is 3. The description never mentions the filter or how it changes the listing, adding nothing beyond the schema here.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('List all wiki pages') and enumerates the returned fields, so the agent knows exactly what comes back. The trailing clause positions it against the read/search siblings.

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?

Explicitly orders its use ('Use first to discover what exists before reading or searching'), naming the read/search siblings as the alternatives. It gives no when-not guidance or explanation of the page_type filter's role in narrowing results.

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