list_wiki_nodes

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only states 'list nodes,' implying a read operation but does not explicitly confirm read-only, rate limits, pagination, or any side effects. The lack of detail forces the agent to assume behavior.

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 very short and front-loaded, but the '[Official API]' prefix is unnecessary noise. It conveys the core purpose concisely but sacrifices detail. Overall, it is efficiently short but not optimally informative.

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 list operation with two parameters and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It omits details about pagination, sorting, response structure, or whether the parent_node_token filters results. The agent lacks sufficient context to use the tool reliably.

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 description coverage is 100%, with each parameter having a basic description in the input schema. The tool description adds no extra meaning beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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's action: 'List nodes in a Wiki space.' The verb 'list' and resource 'nodes' are specific, and the scope 'in a Wiki space' differentiates it from sibling tools like 'get_wiki_node' (single node) or 'list_wiki_spaces' (spaces).

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention that this is for retrieving all nodes in a space versus other operations like creating, updating, or getting a single node. No context about prerequisites or exclusions.

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