codewiki_list_topics

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

Given no annotations, the description fully discloses output format, typical response size, caching duration (30 min), rate limit (10 calls/60s), and deduplication behavior. No contradictions.

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?

Well-structured and informative, but could be slightly more concise. All sentences add value, and key info is front-loaded.

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 tool with one param and existing output schema, the description provides all necessary context: purpose, sibling relationship, output nature, caching, rate limits, and parameter format. 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?

The sole parameter repo_url has no schema description, but the description fully explains accepted formats (full URL, shorthand, bare keywords with disambiguation), compensating robustly.

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 retrieves the overview/available topics for a repo from Google CodeWiki. It distinguishes from siblings by recommending use before codewiki_search_wiki and directing to codewiki_read_contents for full 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?

Explicitly states when to use ('discover what CodeWiki knows about a repo before asking specific questions') and when not ('for detailed content, call codewiki_read_contents'). Also provides response size and caching details.

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