List wiki pages

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is fully covered without the description. The description adds only the scoping fact that the index belongs to one project; it says nothing about pagination, result ordering, or whether page content is included. With annotations carrying the safety burden, this is an adequate but thin contribution.

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 front-loaded sentence with zero filler, so nothing is wasted. It is not structured beyond that one clause, but there is no bloat to trim.

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?

The tool is simple (one fully documented required param, safety covered by annotations, no output schema), so a brief description is defensible. However, for a list endpoint it omits pagination behavior and what the returned index actually contains, which an agent may need before calling.

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?

There is a single parameter (project_id) with 100% schema description coverage, so the baseline is 3. The description notes the list is scoped to a project, which loosely maps to project_id but adds no format or identifier semantics beyond the schema's 'Project id or identifier.'

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 (Lists) and resource (wiki page index) scoped to a project, which implicitly distinguishes it from the wiki_get_page/wiki_save_page/wiki_delete_page siblings. It never names those siblings or explicitly contrasts index listing with page retrieval, so it stops short of full differentiation.

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?

No statement of when to use this versus wiki_get_page, search_query, or files_list_documents. The scope word 'of a project' implies you need a project context, but there is no explicit when/when-not guidance or prerequisites.

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