update_page

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

The description's 'update' aligns with annotations (destructiveHint, openWorldHint), but it adds no extra context about permissions, error handling, or side effects. For a mutation tool, more behavioral detail is expected beyond what annotations provide.

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, short sentence which is clear but extremely minimal. It is not verbose but lacks structural enrichment or front-loading of key details.

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?

Given the tool has 6 parameters, is mutating (destructiveHint), and has no output schema, the description is too sparse. It doesn't explain the update semantics, return behavior, or error conditions, leaving gaps for correct invocation.

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% with descriptions for all 6 parameters, including allowed values for 'editing_roles'. The description adds no further parameter information beyond what the schema already offers. Baseline score of 3.

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 'update an existing wiki page,' which identifies the action and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'create_page' and 'delete_page' at a basic level, though it doesn't elaborate on scope.

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 usage for updating existing pages but provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., 'create_page' for new pages) or any prerequisites. No exclusions or context are given.

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