wiki_python

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

With annotations absent, the description carries the full burden, and it does disclose the three behavioral modes, which is genuinely useful. However, it says nothing about whether this is a safe read-only operation (it is implied but not stated), nor about result ordering, size limits, or what happens on an unknown topic/term. Adequate but not rich.

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?

Three tight fragments, front-loaded with the overall purpose before the mode-specific rules. The '<term>' and '<filename.md>' shorthand is slightly cryptic but readable, and no sentence is wasted.

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 a low-complexity read-only lookup with two optional parameters, and an output schema already exists so return values need no explanation. All three call modes are documented, leaving only minor unstated details like error behavior for a missing page.

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 0%, so the description must compensate, and it does: query is defined as a search term and page as a filename.md, with the default null/absent state mapped to a page listing. The only gap is format detail, e.g. whether page accepts a path or only a bare filename.

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 set (search/read) and a specific resource (the 'python' wiki topic), and the topic name is what separates it from siblings wiki_git and wiki_sql. The three operating modes are spelled out, so an agent knows exactly what the tool does without opening the schema.

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?

Explicitly maps each calling mode to its trigger: no args to list, query=<term> to find matches, page=<filename.md> to fetch a full page. This is clear when-to-use guidance for each variant. It stops short of a 5 because it never states when not to use it or contrasts against the sibling topic tools.

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