codewiki_read_structure

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

Discloses caching (5 min), rate limits (10/60s per URL), deduplication, and typical response size (1-3 KB). No annotations exist, so these details are crucial and well provided.

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 with bold headers, bullet points, and separate section for args. Every sentence adds value; no redundancy.

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?

Covers purpose, usage, parameter details, cache, rate limits, and response size. An output schema exists, so return value explanation is not needed. Complete for a single-parameter tool.

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 description adds rich meaning for the only parameter (repo_url), explaining accepted formats (full URL, shorthand, bare keywords) and auto-resolution with disambiguation, fully compensating for zero schema description coverage.

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 explicitly states the tool retrieves the table of contents/section structure of a repository's documentation, and distinguishes it from siblings by positioning it as the recommended first step before codewiki_read_contents or codewiki_list_topics.

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?

Clear guidance to call this tool before the other documentation tools to discover sections without consuming many tokens, along with performance notes (caching, rate limits).

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