edit_page_tool

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It fails to disclose behavioral traits such as whether editing overwrites the entire page, requires the page to exist, handles protected pages, or affects history. The authentication note is minimal.

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 concise with two sentences, front-loading the purpose. No wasted words, but could be slightly more detailed without harming conciseness.

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 existence of an output schema and full schema coverage, the description is minimally sufficient. However, it lacks context about the tool's behavior (e.g., page existence requirement, edit conflict handling) and does not help the agent understand the full workflow.

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. The description adds no additional meaning beyond schema parameter descriptions. It does not elaborate on parameter semantics, such as the effect of 'minor' or 'summary'.

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 'Edit an existing wiki page' clearly states the action and resource, distinguishing it from sibling tools like create_page_tool and delete_page_tool. However, it could be more precise about modifying an existing page versus creating.

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 only mentions 'Requires authentication' but provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., create_page_tool for new pages) or prerequisites (e.g., page must exist). There is no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use advice.

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