find_page

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 discloses that it returns a single page (not multiple), returns it 'in full', and mentions optional filters. However, it does not explain how the 'best match' is determined, which is a behavioral detail.

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 concise yet thorough. It front-loads the main purpose and usage guidance, then lists parameter details. No wasted words.

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 the presence of an output schema, the description does not need to explain return values. It covers the main part (topic search) and optional filters, distinguishes from siblings, and provides enough context for an agent to use the tool 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?

Despite 0% schema description coverage, the description provides clear explanations for all parameters: topic (with example), page_type (with cross-reference to list_types), tags (with cross-reference to list_tags), and match (explains 'and' vs 'or' semantics). This adds significant meaning beyond the schema.

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 states 'Return the single page that best matches a topic, in full' which clearly specifies the verb, resource, and scope. It also distinguishes itself from the sibling 'search_wiki' by indicating it returns the single best match rather than all mentions.

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 states when to use this tool: 'Use this for "what does the wiki say about X".' And when not to: 'Use search_wiki when you want every mention of X across the corpus.' This provides clear context and alternatives.

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