Query Wiki

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and idempotentHint=true, so the tool is safe and read-only. The description adds value by detailing the vault selection mechanism and that it returns top pages for drilling. No contradictions with annotations.

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?

Two concise sentences with front-loaded purpose and immediate vault context. 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?

The description covers purpose, vault selection, and hints at result usage (drill with notes.read). An output schema exists for return values. However, the wikiRoot parameter is unexplained, leaving a gap for a tool with moderate complexity.

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 0%, so the description must explain parameters. It explains vaultPath and implies topic's role ('relevant to a topic'). However, wikiRoot and limit are not described. Partial compensation, but missing details on wikiRoot reduce clarity.

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 'Rank wiki pages relevant to a topic using filename, alias, tag, summary and body hits', specifying the verb (rank/query), resource (wiki pages), and search criteria. It distinguishes from siblings like notes.search or dataview.query by focusing on wiki-specific relevance ranking and mentions notes.read for drilling in.

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 explains the vault selection behavior ('session-active vault...unless explicit vaultPath') and notes that results can be drilled into with notes.read. It provides context for when to use but does not explicitly contrast with alternatives like notes.search or tags.search.

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