redmine_get_wiki_page

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It only states that the tool gets content and metadata, but does not mention read-only nature, authentication needs, error handling (e.g., page not found), or what metadata includes. The '[Alpha]' tag hints at instability but provides no specifics.

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, efficient sentence with no superfluous information. The '[Alpha]' prefix appropriately warns of experimental status. Every word is necessary.

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 no output schema and no annotations, the description should provide a clearer picture of what the agent can expect from the tool. It lacks details about the return structure (content and metadata fields), error scenarios, or any side effects. For a simple tool, this is insufficient for complete agent understanding.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It mentions 'project and page title' which maps to project_id and title, but does not explain the format of project_id (can be string or integer with pattern) or provide any additional details about parameter usage. The agent would lack sufficient understanding of parameter constraints.

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 the verb 'Get', the resource 'content and metadata of a Redmine wiki page', and the key parameters 'by project and page title'. It distinguishes from siblings like redmine_list_wiki_pages (which lists pages) and redmine_delete_wiki_page (which deletes).

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 usage is implied by the purpose: retrieving a specific wiki page. However, there is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like redmine_list_wiki_pages, nor any mention of prerequisites or context.

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