taiga_edit_wiki_page

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the transparency burden. It mentions the precondition of fetching the current version, which implies concurrency control, but does not disclose other behavioral aspects such as auth requirements, error conditions on version mismatch, or the overwriting nature of the edit beyond 'edit.'

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?

Two concise sentences, front-loaded with the purpose, and the second sentence provides critical usage guidance without redundancy.

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?

For a simple edit tool with no output schema, the description covers the essential workflow: what the tool does and the mandatory pre-step. It could add notes about error handling or return values, but the description is sufficiently complete for the tool's complexity.

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 covers all parameters with descriptions (100%), including the version parameter explaining it must be obtained from GET. The description adds minimal extra param information, so baseline 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?

Description clearly states the tool's function ('Edit the content of a wiki page') with a specific verb and resource, and differentiates it from sibling tools like create/get/delete wiki pages.

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 instructs to fetch the current version via taiga_get_wiki_page before editing, which is a clear usage prerequisite. This provides essential context for when to use this tool and the required pre-step.

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