Parse Wikitext Tool

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

The readOnlyHint=true annotation already establishes that this is a non-mutating operation, so the description's only obligation is to add context — template resolution behavior, how the optional title affects output, or what happens with malformed wikitext. It adds none of that; the entire description just restates the operation. The one useful detail (title for template resolution) lives only in the schema.

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 terse sentence with no waste, and the operation/transformation is front-loaded. It is arguably too terse rather than bloated, which is penalized in contextual completeness rather than here.

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, so return values need no explanation, and the input schema fully documents both parameters. However, a wikitext parser has real behavioral subtleties (template/module expansion, dependence on title, error handling on invalid markup) that go unmentioned, leaving the definition only minimally adequate.

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%, with both parameters documented inline, including the optional title's role in template resolution. The description contributes nothing 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 (parse) and the exact transformation (raw wikitext to HTML), which is unambiguous about what comes in and what comes out. It does not distinguish itself from the sibling get_page_html_tool, which also yields HTML, so an agent can't be fully certain from the description alone which one to reach for.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no mention of the sibling alternatives such as get_page_html_tool or get_page_tool. The agent must infer the use case purely from the verb.

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