list_wiki_pages

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It states the output includes titles, versions, and dates, but does not mention if it includes all versions or just current, the meaning of 'dates', any permissions required, or whether the operation is read-only. It hints at read nature but lacks depth.

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?

Single sentence that effectively conveys purpose and return data. No redundant information. Perfectly concise while covering key aspects.

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?

The description is minimally complete for a simple list tool, but lacks details like pagination, ordering, inclusion of archived pages, or any filtering capabilities. With no output schema, the return format is partially described but not fully. Adequate but not comprehensive.

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% (project_id described as 'Project ID (numeric) or identifier (string)'). The description adds no additional semantic value beyond the schema; it merely restates the parameter's role in listing pages of a project. Baseline 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?

Description clearly states it lists all wiki pages of a project and returns titles, versions, and dates. This distinguishes from siblings like get_wiki_page (single page) and get_wiki_page_version (specific version). However, it does not explicitly differentiate from other list tools like list_projects or list_agile_sprints, though context suggests it's for wiki pages.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description does not mention scenarios where this tool is preferred over get_wiki_page, get_wiki_page_version, or other list tools. Implied usage only from the tool name and description.

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