List Wiki page grids

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint and openWorldHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely new behavioral context: it is auto-paginated and drains next_cursor, and it is capped at the configured item cap unless limit is supplied. These are traits the annotations cannot express.

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?

Front-loads what a grid is, then pagination behavior, then return shape, then the id-sourcing hint. Dense and largely waste-free, though the final sentence mixes field shape and parameter sourcing slightly awkwardly.

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?

For a read-only list endpoint with full schema coverage and no output schema, the description covers what an agent needs: the scoping parameter's origin, pagination behavior, the cap rule, and the shape of each returned ref. Nothing material is missing.

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, but the description adds value beyond the schema by explaining that page_id is a numeric id and where to obtain it, and reiterating the cap-vs-limit tradeoff in prose. That lifts it slightly above the schema-only baseline.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('dynamic tables (grids) attached to a page id') and clarifies what a grid is, which distinguishes it from siblings like wiki_grids_get or wiki_pages_get. An agent can identify the operation without opening the schema.

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?

Gives concrete guidance on acquiring the required page_id, naming pages_get_meta and pages_descendants_list as the sources that carry numeric ids. It does not, however, contrast this listing tool with sibling grid tools (e.g. when to use wiki_grids_get instead), so it stops short of full when/when-not routing.

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