List Group Pages

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=true. The description repeats 'Read-only' and mentions titles and URL slugs, but does not add much behavioral context beyond the annotations, such as pagination behavior or permission requirements.

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, with the core list operation stated first and the read-only property stated second. Every phrase contributes useful information.

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 one-parameter read-only list tool, the description plus annotations and schema are nearly complete. The main missing detail is pagination or size-limit behavior, but the description does indicate the returned fields: titles and URL slugs.

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%, and the schema already states that group_id is a numeric string obtained from list_my_groups. The description does not add parameter-specific meaning beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline score 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 gives a specific verb and resource: list wiki pages in a group workspace. It also distinguishes the scope from course-level page listing by specifying 'group workspace,' and adds the useful return-field hint 'titles and URL slugs.'

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 group-workspace scope implies when to use this tool, but it does not explicitly compare it with siblings such as list_pages or get_page_content. There is no guidance on when not to use it or what prerequisites are required beyond the relevant group ID.

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