Update Wiki Page

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

Annotations indicate a non-read, non-idempotent, non-destructive write operation, but the description adds no behavioral context beyond that. No mention of side effects, authentication requirements, or constraints.

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 extremely short (5 words), but it sacrifices informativeness. It does not provide enough context to be useful, making it under-specified rather than concise.

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 output schema, and 0% schema description coverage, the description is grossly incomplete. It fails to explain what each parameter does or how to use the tool effectively.

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 description only mentions 'slug', while there are 5 parameters (slug, title, format, content, project_id) with 0% schema description coverage. No explanation of the purpose or expected values for other parameters.

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 action (update) and resource (wiki page), and identifies the key identifier (slug). However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like gitlab_update_group_wiki_page, which also updates a wiki page.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as gitlab_create_wiki_page for creation or gitlab_delete_wiki_page for deletion. No exclusions or context provided.

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