List Wiki Pages

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions 'paginated', which is a useful behavioral trait, but does not disclose other behaviors such as the effect of 'with_content', return format, or potential authentication requirements. It adds some value beyond the schema but lacks rich context.

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 a single, compact sentence that front-loads the core purpose. The parenthetical '(paginated)' efficiently conveys the key behavioral note without unnecessary words. Every element serves a distinct function.

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 tool's simplicity, the schema's full parameter coverage, and the absence of an output schema, the description is sufficiently complete. It states the primary function and the pagination behavior, which covers the essential context for a straightforward list operation. It could be enhanced by mention of comparison to related tools, but that is already addressed in the usage guidelines dimension.

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%, so the base score is 3. The description itself does not add any parameter details beyond what the schema already provides. For instance, 'paginated' relates to the 'page' parameter but the schema already explains the default. No additional semantic value is added.

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 verb 'Get' with the resource 'all wiki pages for a given project', specifying both the scope (all) and the target (project). This distinguishes it from the sibling tool 'gitlab_get_wiki_page' which fetches a single page, making the purpose unmistakable.

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 implies usage for listing all wiki pages of a project, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus the sibling 'gitlab_get_wiki_page' or other list tools. There is no mention of alternatives or exclusions, only a basic statement of function.

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