List Pages Tool

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so safety is covered structurally, but the description adds nothing beyond that - no mention of result ordering, pagination behavior via from_title, or the default/max limit. With an annotation present the bar is lower, yet the description contributes essentially zero behavioral context of its own.

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?

A single compact sentence with zero filler, and the core action is front-loaded. Nothing is redundant or padded relative to what it says.

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?

An output schema exists and all parameters are schema-documented, so the basics are covered. But for a listing tool with a pagination parameter and overlapping siblings, the description omits the distinction from search_tool and any pagination/ordering note, leaving a small but real gap given the sibling landscape.

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%, so all four parameters (limit, prefix, namespace, from_title) are already documented with defaults and semantics. The description only restates the prefix filter and adds no syntax, interaction, or edge-case detail beyond the schema, making the baseline 3 appropriate.

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 (list) and resource (wiki pages) plus a qualifier (optional prefix filter), so the agent instantly knows the operation. However, it does not differentiate from siblings like search_tool, get_page_tool, or list_recent_changes_tool, which overlap in retrieving page collections.

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?

Usage is only implied: 'List wiki pages' suggests enumeration, and 'optional prefix filter' hints at prefix-scoped listing. There is no explicit when-to-use guidance (e.g., use instead of search_tool when you need a full or prefix-scoped enumeration), and no mention of when not to use it.

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