Search Warcraft Wiki

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It only states that the tool searches and returns page titles, but does not disclose any behavioral traits such as rate limits, authentication requirements, or pagination handling (beyond the limit parameter).

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the purpose, and every word contributes. No redundancy or unnecessary detail.

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 simple input schema (2 params, no output schema), the description covers the core functionality and links to get_wiki_page. However, it lacks explanation of the limit parameter, pagination behavior, and potential error cases, leaving minor gaps.

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 50%, with query having a description and example in the description ('e.g. "TOC format"'), which adds value. The limit parameter lacks description in both schema and description, though schema provides default and bounds. The description partially compensates for the gap but does not fully cover limit semantics.

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 it searches warcraft.wiki.gg and lists the content areas (addon API, UI widgets, etc.). It distinguishes from sibling search tools (search_api, search_source) by specifying 'wiki' and mentions that it returns page titles to use with get_wiki_page.

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 that after searching, one should use get_wiki_page, but it does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool over other search tools like search_api or search_source. No 'when not to use' or alternatives are discussed.

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