Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
mediawiki-mcp-server

mediawiki-mcp-server

by olgasafonova
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Go
Hybrid

mediawiki_get_related

Read-only

Find pages related to a wiki page via categories, links, or backlinks. Use it to show linked or associated content for a given title.

Instructions

Find pages related to a given page via links and categories.

USE WHEN: User asks "what pages are related to X", "show linked pages", "find associated content".

NOT FOR: Finding content-similar pages (use mediawiki_find_similar_pages for duplicate detection).

PARAMETERS:

  • title: Page name (required)

  • method: "categories" (default), "links", "backlinks", or "all"

  • limit: Max related pages (default 20)

RETURNS: Related page titles with relationship type.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNoMaximum related pages to return (default 20, max 50)
titleYesPage title to find related pages for
methodNoMethod to find related: 'categories' (default), 'links', 'backlinks', or 'all'
rationaleNoOptional one-sentence explanation of why you are calling this tool. Used for audit trails when present.

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
countYes
titleYes
methodYes
related_pagesYes
categories_usedNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv1.31.0
    • addedInput schema / properties / rationale
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Optional one-sentence explanation of why you are calling this tool. Used for audit trails when present.",
+  "type": "string"
+}
  2. First observed

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true; the description adds genuinely new context beyond them: the method options, defaults, and the shape of the return ('related page titles with relationship type'). It does not explain the idempotentHint=false nuance or result volatility, so it falls short of a 5.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Front-loaded purpose sentence followed by tight USE WHEN / NOT FOR / PARAMETERS / RETURNS blocks. Every line carries routing or parameter information; no filler.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be spelled out, though a brief RETURNS line is provided anyway. Combined with explicit routing guidance, defaults, and method options, an agent has everything needed to call it correctly.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so every parameter is already documented in the schema, including the limit max of 50. The description restates title/method/limit defaults but omits the optional 'rationale' audit parameter entirely, adding little beyond the structured fields. Baseline 3 applies.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb and resource ('Find pages related to a given page') plus the mechanism ('via links and categories'). This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like mediawiki_get_backlinks or mediawiki_find_similar_pages without opening any schema.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Explicit USE WHEN section with quoted user phrasings, plus an explicit NOT FOR clause naming the alternative (mediawiki_find_similar_pages) and the condition that selects it. Nothing is left to inference.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools