get_wiki_page

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

Although no annotations are provided, the description discloses key behaviors: the return includes content and attachments, a 404 does not distinguish between nonexistent pages and access restrictions, and the server cannot edit/delete pages. This is thorough transparency for a read operation.

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 110 words across four sentences, but every sentence adds value: purpose, identifier acquisition, 404 semantics, and server limitations. It is front-loaded with the primary purpose and efficiently packed with actionable context.

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 tool with one parameter, no annotations, and no output schema, the description covers purpose, parameter source and caveats, error behavior, and relevant server capabilities. It is remarkably complete, leaving no critical operational question unanswered.

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?

With 0% schema coverage, the description compensates by explaining that page_uuid is a page identifier obtained from get_wiki_tree or search_wiki, and crucially that a page uuid is not a wiki uuid. This adds significant meaning beyond the raw UUID format in the schema.

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 states 'One wiki page in full, with its content and any attachments it references,' clearly identifying the tool as fetching a single wiki page with its full content and attachments. It distinguishes from siblings like get_wiki_tree and get_wiki_page_version by indicating it provides the full current page rather than structure or versions.

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 explicitly tells the agent where to obtain the required page_uuid: 'Get page_uuid from get_wiki_tree or from a search_wiki hit.' It warns against confusing page uuids with wiki uuids, clarifies the 404 behavior, and advises using append to correct content when editing is impossible. This provides clear when-to-use and caveats.

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