azure_create_wiki_page

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 states the basic creation behavior but does not disclose potential side effects, error conditions, authentication requirements, or what happens on path conflicts. This is insufficient for a mutation tool beyond the obvious 'creates'.

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 concise sentence that communicates the core purpose without any filler or redundancy. It is front-loaded with the verb 'Cria' and clearly names the resource, making it easy to parse.

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?

With no annotations, no output schema, and a minimal one-line description, the tool lacks essential context for reliable use. The schema documents parameters but does not explain what the tool returns (if anything), whether an existing wiki identifier is required, or how conflicts are handled. This is inadequate for a mutation tool.

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 each parameter (wikiIdentifier, path, content) already has a meaningful description. The tool description adds no additional parameter-level detail beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline score of 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 clearly states the verb 'Cria' (creates) and the specific resource 'uma nova página na wiki' (a new wiki page). This precisely conveys the tool's action and distinguishes it from sibling tools like azure_update_wiki_page or azure_list_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?

The description gives no context on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of prerequisites (e.g., an existing wiki), nor any exclusions or alternative tool suggestions. The only implied usage is the obvious 'when you need to create a page', which is not explicit guidance.

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