Update Wiki Page

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

Adds important behavioral details beyond the annotations: full-page replacement semantics, YFM markdown limitations (GitHub alerts, raw HTML), and a pointer to the yfm-cheatsheet resource. The idempotentHint annotation is consistent, and the description does not conflict; it complements the safety profile.

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 two concise sentences, front-loaded with the primary purpose and then adding essential behavioral details. No filler or redundancy; every sentence earns its place.

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 six parameters all documented in the schema, an output schema present, and no nested objects, the description covers the most critical behavioral quirk (full-page replacement) and format constraints. It does not explicitly state that at least one identifier (slug or page_id) is required, but the schema already provides 'Provide either page_id or slug.'

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 each parameter is already documented. The description adds value for the content parameter by clarifying full-page replacement and YFM formatting constraints, which are not fully detailed in the schema. Other parameters rely on schema descriptions, which is acceptable.

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 'Update an existing Yandex Wiki page' with a specific verb and resource. It also highlights full-page content replacement and YFM markdown, distinguishing it from sibling tools like page_create, page_append_content, and page_get.

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 context is implied: use when updating an existing page with full-page content replacement. However, no explicit alternatives or exclusions are mentioned (e.g., comparing to page_append_content), and the decision between updating via title vs. content is left to the schema.

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