parse_wikitext_tool

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It adds valuable context that templates are resolved during parsing (mentioned in the title parameter description) and identifies the output format as HTML, but omits whether the operation is read-only, idempotent, or has side effects.

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 Args/Returns structure is appropriate given the lack of schema descriptions, though slightly formal. Information is front-loaded with the core purpose in the first sentence, and there is no extraneous content.

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?

For a straightforward transformation tool with two simple parameters and an output schema (implied by the Returns documentation), the description adequately covers the necessary information. The explanation of template resolution adds necessary domain context for wiki operations.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description effectively compensates by documenting both parameters: it explains that 'wikitext' is the raw content to parse and that 'title' provides context for template resolution, including the optional nature of the latter.

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 specific action ('Parse') and resource ('raw wikitext') with the output format ('HTML'), effectively distinguishing it from sibling get_page_html_tool which retrieves existing rendered pages rather than parsing raw content.

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?

While the description implies this tool transforms raw wikitext rather than fetching existing pages, it lacks explicit guidance on when to use this versus get_page_html_tool or whether this is appropriate for previewing content before saving with create_page_tool/edit_page_tool.

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