get_wiki_page_contentFetch plain-text content from a RuneScape Wiki page by title; follows redirects, but search first if the exact page title is unknown.
Fetch plain-text content of a RuneScape Wiki page. Follows redirects. Pass an exact title; call search_wiki first when the title is unknown.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| page | Yes | Wiki page title (spaces allowed; redirects are followed) |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, openWorld, non-destructive, so the safety profile is covered. The description still adds real context beyond that: redirects are followed and the payload is plain text rather than rendered HTML, which matters for downstream parsing.
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?
Three short sentences, zero filler, with the core action front-loaded and the routing advice last. Every sentence earns its place.
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 one-parameter read tool with no output schema, the description supplies the key missing fact (plain-text return) and the redirect behavior. It could note truncation or size limits on large pages, but nothing essential is absent.
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% and the single 'page' parameter already documents that spaces are allowed and redirects are followed. The description's 'pass an exact title' reinforces the requirement but adds little beyond the schema, so the baseline 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?
States a specific verb (fetch) and resource (plain-text content of a RuneScape Wiki page), and immediately distinguishes itself from search_wiki, the closest sibling. An agent can tell what it returns 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?
Explicitly routes the agent: 'call search_wiki first when the title is unknown.' This names both the alternative tool and the condition that selects it, leaving nothing to inference.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.