wiki-mcp

get_page

Retrieve page content and YAML frontmatter by providing a direct path or simple slug. Get structured data for any wiki page instantly.

Instructions

Returns the content and parsed YAML frontmatter of any page. Accepts direct paths (e.g. 'concepts/transformer.md') or simple slugs ('transformer').

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "slug_or_path": "<slug_or_path>"
    },
    "name": "get_page"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`slug_or_path`	Yes

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.2.0Sep 8, 2026

TDQS

A3.6/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are present, and the description does not disclose error handling, potential side effects, or behaviors like unresolved paths. It only states what is returned, omitting any limitations or failure modes.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is two sentences long, concise, and structured effectively with examples. No redundant information.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

The description adequately states the return value (content and frontmatter) and input format. Without an output schema, it could detail the structure of the return, but for a simple read operation it is reasonably complete.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The schema provides only a parameter name without description. The description adds meaningful context by explaining that the parameter accepts direct paths or simple slugs, with examples, fully covering the single parameter.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the tool returns page content and parsed YAML frontmatter, with explicit examples of accepted inputs. This is specific and unambiguous.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description explains how to specify pages but does not indicate when to use this tool over the sibling tools (read_orientation, search_wiki). No comparative guidance is provided.

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

Deploy Server