Export the whole wiki

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

Annotations already cover readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, so the description is not obligated to restate safety; it does add real behavior beyond them: output is truncated at 200 KB, the call fails when the file is missing, and the build prerequisite must be satisfied. The only gap is what an agent should do after hitting the 200 KB cutoff, which is not addressed.

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?

One front-loaded paragraph: purpose, format menu, truncation limit, failure mode, prerequisite, then the sibling routing. Every sentence carries information, with only the redundant 'Read-only.' clause duplicating the annotations.

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?

For a one-parameter tool with no output schema, the description must explain the return shape and it does: text output, 200 KB cap, and the special 'list' variant returning JSON with sizes. Combined with the failure and prerequisite notes, an agent has everything needed to invoke it 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 coverage is 100%, so 3 would be the baseline, but the description goes further by defining what each enum value actually yields (short index vs. flattened pages vs. schema.org graph vs. JSON file list with sizes). That meaning is absent from the schema, which only says 'Which export format to return.'

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?

States a concrete verb and resource (return one generated export file from site/) and enumerates every accepted format with a short gloss of each, so the agent knows exactly what the tool produces. It also distinguishes itself from wiki_query by noting that tool is cheaper for specific facts.

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 frames the use case (load the whole wiki at once) and names the alternative with the condition that selects it (wiki_query for specific facts). It also supplies the prerequisite that the build must have been run first, which an agent cannot infer.

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