List Pages

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, covering the tool's non-destructive nature and potential incompleteness. The description adds no further behavioral context (e.g., pagination, filtering, auth requirements) but does not contradict annotations, so a baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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, front-loaded sentence with zero filler. Every word contributes to the core purpose, making it highly concise and structured.

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?

With no output schema and only a single parameter, the description is too thin for an agent to fully understand the return value or any limitations (e.g., pagination, fields returned, ordering). It simply states 'list all' without clarifying the nature of the response, which is a notable gap for a list operation.

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 description coverage is 100% (course_id is fully described in the schema). The description adds no additional meaning to the parameter beyond what the schema already provides, so a baseline of 3 is given per the rubric.

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 the action ('List') and the resource ('wiki pages') with explicit scope ('in a course'). It distinguishes from siblings like get_page (single page) and create/update/delete operations, making its purpose unambiguous.

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 does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives, but the phrase 'List all' implies it is for obtaining an overview of all pages. No exclusions or alternative recommendations are provided, making the usage context merely implied rather than explicit.

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