mediawiki_get_page

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

Annotations already indicate read-only and idempotent behavior. The description adds important behavioral detail: large pages are truncated at 25KB. This goes beyond what annotations provide, though no additional info on auth or rate limits.

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 and well-structured: a single-line purpose, then USE WHEN, NOT FOR, and parameter list. Every sentence is necessary and adds value with no redundancy.

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 complexity (many siblings, output schema exists), the description covers purpose, usage, parameter details, truncation behavior, and fallback advice. It is complete for an agent to select and invoke this 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?

Input schema has 100% coverage with descriptions for all three parameters. The description adds minimal extra semantics (e.g., default format 'wikitext'), but mostly restates schema info. Baseline of 3 is appropriate as schema does the heavy lifting.

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 'Retrieve full wiki page content' with a specific verb and resource. It explicitly distinguishes from sibling tools like mediawiki_get_sections, mediawiki_search_in_page, and mediawiki_get_page_info by stating what it is NOT for.

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?

Provides explicit USE WHEN examples and NOT FOR conditions with alternative tool names. Also advises to use mediawiki_resolve_title if title is not found, offering full guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives.

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