create_wiki_node

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It only states that the resource is owned by the user (UAT-first) and that it is an official API. There is no mention of side effects, permissions required, or what happens to existing resources. This is insufficient for a creation tool.

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 extremely concise with two sentences. It front-loads the purpose and efficiently conveys the key differentiator (UAT-first ownership). Every word earns its place, with 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?

Given the complexity of 6 parameters and no output schema, the description lacks necessary context. It does not explain the purpose of 'node_type' or 'origin_node_token', nor does it mention the expected return value (e.g., the created node token). It also does not compare with sibling tools to guide selection.

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%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds the context that 'obj_type picks the underlying resource' and lists the types, which repeats the schema's enum description. No additional semantic value beyond the schema is provided for other parameters.

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 action 'Create a new Wiki node inside a space' and mentions the key parameter 'obj_type' which selects the resource type. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'copy_wiki_node' or 'update_wiki_node', though the verb 'create' implies the primary use case.

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 mentions 'UAT-first so the resource is owned by the user,' which hints at ownership implications but does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives or any conditions/precautions. No when-not-to-use information is given.

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