redmine_delete_wiki_page

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only says 'Delete', which implies a destructive action, but omits details like whether the deletion is permanent, cascading effects, permission requirements, or confirmation steps. The agent is left with minimal behavioral context.

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 extremely concise (4 words), which is efficient but at the cost of informativeness. It could include a brief clarification about project scope without being verbose.

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 simplicity of the tool (2 required params, no output schema), the description could be sufficient if it were more context-rich. However, it lacks key details such as the requirement for project_id, the need for exact title matching, and confirmation of deletion success. The agent may hesitate due to uncertainty about side effects.

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?

The input schema has 100% coverage, already describing both parameters (title and project_id) with their types and purposes. The description adds no additional meaning or constraints beyond what the schema provides, so it meets the baseline but offers no extra value.

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 explicitly states the action (delete) and the resource (wiki page), which is clear and specific. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like redmine_delete_issue or redmine_delete_time_entry, as the resource type is already implied by the tool name.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool over alternatives (e.g., when to delete a wiki page vs. updating it). There is no mention of prerequisites, context, or exclusions.

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