redmine_wiki_pages_list

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. The description does communicate that this is a read-only listing operation via 'List' and the GET endpoint, but it does not describe response format, pagination, or whether page contents are included. This is adequate but not richly transparent.

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 action and resource, then adds the endpoint as supporting detail. Every element earns its place with no filler.

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 single-parameter listing tool, the description is complete enough: it names the action, resource, project scope, and endpoint. It does not describe the response shape, but the endpoint and verb make the operation reasonably clear even without an output schema.

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 schema already documents the single project_id parameter. The description's phrase 'for a project' adds minor contextual reinforcement, but it does not add meaningful semantics beyond what the schema already provides. 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?

The description states a specific verb ('List'), a clear resource ('wiki pages'), and a scope ('for a project'). It also includes the exact endpoint, and the plural 'pages' clearly distinguishes this from sibling tools like redmine_wiki_page_get, which operate on a single 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 when this tool should be used: when the goal is to list wiki pages for a given project. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or contrast with redmine_wiki_page_get, so there is no direct guidance on choosing between listing all pages and fetching a single page.

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