redmine_wiki_get_index

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 the basic operation and does not disclose pagination, ordering, permissions, or what fields are returned. The read-only nature is implied rather than explicit.

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, focused sentence: 'Get a list of all wiki pages in a Redmine project'. It is front-loaded with the verb and resource, contains no filler, and is appropriately concise for a simple list operation.

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?

The description is adequate to invoke the tool with the required project_id, but with no output schema and no annotations it omits important context such as return format, pagination, and how the resulting page list can be used with sibling tools like redmine_wiki_get_page. There is a clear gap in behavioral and usage context.

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?

The schema has one parameter, project_id, with a clear description, and schema description coverage is 100%. The tool description adds no parameter-level detail beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline score of 3 applies.

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 uses a specific verb 'Get a list' and specifies the resource 'all wiki pages in a Redmine project'. This clearly differentiates it from sibling tools like redmine_wiki_get_page (single page) and redmine_wiki_put_page/delete_page (write operations).

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 use when you want to list all wiki pages for a project, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives. No exclusions or alternative routing are provided; the agent must infer from the word 'list' and sibling names.

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