Clone Wiki Page

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

It discloses that only title and content are copied, while child pages, comments, attachments, and edit history remain with the original, and that the copy gets a new page id. This adds significant context beyond the annotations (destructiveHint false) about side effects and limitations.

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 yet information-dense, with four sentences covering purpose, copied fields, failure mode, and the move workaround. It is front-loaded with the primary action and contains no filler.

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 presence of an output schema and the extensive behavioral details, the description is fully complete. It covers what is copied, what is not, failure conditions, and how to handle relocation, making it self-sufficient for an AI agent.

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 the schema already fully describes all parameters. The description does not add new parameter-specific details beyond the schema; for example, the schema already notes 'Must not be occupied by an existing page' for target. Hence baseline 3.

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 action: 'Copy a Yandex Wiki page to a new slug' and specifies the return value ('return the copy's id and slug'). It distinguishes this from sibling tools like page_create and page_update by focusing on cloning existing content and noting its limitations.

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 explicitly explains when to use this tool for relocating pages, stating 'The Wiki API has no true move/rename; to relocate a page, clone it and delete the original.' It also mentions the failure condition on occupied targets, which helps in planning usage.

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