taiga_wiki_watchers

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It only states that the tool lists watchers, without disclosing the return format, whether it's a read-only operation (though implied), or any other behavioral traits. The agent gets no insight into what the response contains.

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 a single sentence with no filler, front-loading the action and resource. Every word 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?

The tool is simple with one parameter and no output schema, and the description gives the core purpose. However, without annotations or return-value details, the agent is left guessing about the response structure and any special behavior. It is adequate but not comprehensive.

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 already describes the only parameter 'id' as 'Wiki page ID' with 100% coverage. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 'List watchers of a wiki page' uses a specific verb ('List') and a clear resource ('watchers of a wiki page'). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like taiga_wiki_get or other *_watchers tools by specifying 'wiki page'.

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?

There is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description does not mention that wiki pages have distinct watcher tools or provide any exclusions or prerequisites. Usage is only implied by the action.

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