redmine_get_wiki_page

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

No annotations are provided, and the description only states 'Get content'. It does not disclose any behavioral traits such as read-only nature, required permissions, or what happens if the page does not exist.

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 with a single sentence that clearly states the tool's purpose. There is no unnecessary information, and it is front-loaded with the key action and resource.

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 and the description covers the basic purpose. However, it lacks details about the output format (e.g., returns page content in HTML or markdown) and how version parameter affects results. Given the absence of an output schema, a bit more context would be helpful.

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?

All three parameters (title, version, project_id) are fully described in the input schema (100% coverage). The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 'Get content of a specific wiki page' clearly states the action and resource. It is specific to retrieving the full page content, but does not explicitly differentiate from the sibling tool 'redmine_list_wiki_pages' which lists page titles only.

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 usage guidance provided. The description does not mention when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'redmine_list_wiki_pages' for browsing or 'redmine_create_or_update_wiki_page' for modifications.

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