browse_wiki

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint: true, and the description adds valuable behavioral details beyond that: it returns only keys and titles, excludes full content, and is intended for discovery. This gives the agent a clear picture of the tool's behavior and limitations.

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 three short sentences: the first states purpose, the second defines return scope, and the third gives usage guidance. Every sentence earns its place, and the most important information is front-loaded.

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 (1 optional param with schema description, readOnly annotation, output schema exists). The description covers purpose, return content, and usage timing. The only minor gap is not explicitly clarifying that 'topic' is optional, though the schema already indicates this. Overall, it is adequately complete for an agent to use correctly.

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 100% for the single parameter, so the baseline is 3. The description's phrase 'by topic/parent' essentially repeats the schema's 'Filter by parent topic' without adding additional semantics like whether the parameter is optional or what happens when omitted. No extra value is added.

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 uses a specific verb ('Browse') and resource ('wiki sections') and clearly distinguishes from siblings by stating it returns only 'section keys and titles without full content', positioning it as a lightweight discovery tool versus content-fetching tools like get_wiki_section.

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 provides clear guidance: 'Use this to discover relevant sections before fetching content.' This implies when to use it and hints that other tools fetch full content, but it does not explicitly name alternative tools or state when not to use it, so it falls short of a 5.

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