Wiki List Library

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the behavioral burden. 'List all pages' clearly signals a read-only enumeration, and the domain note about Ray Peat's texts is helpful context, but nothing is said about pagination, how `limit` truncates results, or result ordering.

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?

Three short lines, front-loaded with the core action and namespace before the domain note and the example call. Every line is doing work, though the example title is illustrative rather than essential.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need no explanation, and the read-only listing nature plus the title format are covered. The only gap is guidance on result volume/pagination relative to the limit parameter.

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?

Only one parameter (limit) with 100% schema coverage and a default of 50 already documented in the schema. The description adds no syntax or behavior for this parameter, so this is the baseline case where the schema does the work.

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 (List) and resource (pages in the Library namespace) plus the title format 'Library:<title>', so the agent knows exactly what comes back. It does not explicitly contrast itself with the nearby siblings wiki_list_all_pages or wiki_search, so sibling differentiation is only implicit.

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?

Gives a useful follow-up ('Read one with wiki_read(...)') and tells the agent what kind of content lives in this namespace, which implies when to use it. However, it never states when to prefer this over wiki_list_all_pages, wiki_list_categories, or wiki_search, and offers no exclusions.

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