osrs_wiki_get_page_info

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure but offers minimal information. It doesn't describe whether this is a read-only operation, what permissions might be needed, rate limits, error handling, or the format of returned information. The description is too vague to provide meaningful behavioral context beyond the basic action.

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, efficient sentence that directly states the tool's purpose without any unnecessary words. It's appropriately sized for a simple tool and front-loaded with the core action, making it easy for an agent to parse quickly.

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 lack of annotations and output schema, the description is insufficiently complete. It doesn't explain what information is returned, how results are structured, or any behavioral aspects like error conditions. For a tool that presumably returns structured data about wiki pages, more context about the output would be necessary for effective agent use.

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?

The input schema has 100% description coverage, with the 'titles' parameter clearly documented as a comma-separated list of page titles. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what's in the schema, so it meets the baseline of 3 for adequate but not enhanced parameter understanding.

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' and resource 'information about specific pages on the OSRS Wiki', making the purpose immediately understandable. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'osrs_wiki_search' (which searches rather than gets specific pages) and 'osrs_wiki_parse_page' (which parses rather than gets info). However, it doesn't specify what type of information is retrieved, keeping it from a perfect score.

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 doesn't mention when to choose this over 'osrs_wiki_search' (for searching vs. getting specific pages) or 'osrs_wiki_parse_page' (for parsing vs. getting info). There's no context about prerequisites, limitations, or typical use cases, leaving the agent with minimal usage direction.

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