create_or_update_wiki_page

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It only discloses optimistic concurrency via if_match but omits other behaviors like error responses, idempotency, or permission requirements. Minimal disclosure.

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 uses a clear docstring format with parameter list. It is concise but not overly brief; every sentence adds information. Could be slightly more compact.

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 description covers parameter meanings well but lacks completeness. No output schema exists to explain return values, and the description omits error scenarios, rate limits, or authorization needs. Adequate but with gaps.

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?

Despite 0% schema description coverage, the description explains all 6 parameters in context (e.g., 'Markdown content for the page,' 'ETag for optimistic concurrency'). This adds value beyond the bare schema titles.

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 'Create or update a wiki page,' providing a specific verb and resource combination. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_wiki_page, which only reads.

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 implicitly conveys usage via the if_match parameter (required for updates, empty for creates) but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives or when not to use it. No exclusions or guidance on prerequisites.

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