get-page

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint, destructiveHint, idempotentHint. The description adds important behavioral details: truncation at 50000 bytes with trailing marker, error on missing title, and how to fetch specific sections. No contradictions.

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?

Concise yet comprehensive. Front-loaded with purpose, then detailed parameter usage. Every sentence adds value with no redundancy.

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 annotations and input schema, the description covers all necessary context: truncation behavior, error handling, relationships to siblings, and return format implied (wikitext, HTML, metadata, sections). No 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 coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds meaning: explains metadata=true yields revision ID and section outline, content values (source/html/none), and section parameter range (0=lead, 1..N).

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 returns a single wiki page with options for wikitext, HTML, or metadata. It distinguishes from sibling tools like get-pages (for multiple pages) and get-revision (for historical revisions).

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?

Explicit instructions on when to use metadata=true, content='none', and section parameter. Also provides alternatives for multiple pages (get-pages) and historical revisions (get-revision).

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