List Group Wiki Pages

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

Annotations already declare the tool as read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive. The description adds no further behavioral details (e.g., pagination, filtering behavior). With good annotation coverage, a 3 is appropriate for minimal additional context.

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, short sentence that is front-loaded and efficient. However, it is too sparse given the tool's complexity and lack of parameter documentation, so it loses some points for incompleteness.

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?

With 5 parameters, no schema descriptions, no output schema, and a minimal description, the tool definition is significantly incomplete. Critical information about pagination, content options, and filtering is missing.

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 has 5 parameters but 0% schema description coverage. The description does not explain any parameter meanings (e.g., 'page', 'per_page', 'render_html', 'with_content'), leaving the agent with no guidance beyond schema types.

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 tool lists wiki pages in a group, using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like gitlab_list_wiki_pages (likely project-level) by specifying 'in a group'.

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 implies the tool is for listing group wiki pages but provides no explicit guidance on when to use it versus alternatives (e.g., gitlab_list_wiki_pages for project wikis). No when-not or usage context is given.

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