mediawiki_get_stale_pages

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint. The description adds that results are sorted by last edit (oldest first) with days since edit and last editor, enhancing transparency without contradicting annotations.

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 with clear sections: one-sentence purpose, 'USE WHEN', 'NOT FOR', 'PARAMETERS', 'RETURNS'. No extraneous information.

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 tool's moderate complexity, full schema coverage, rich annotations, and presence of an output schema, the description fully covers purpose, usage, parameters, and output format. No gaps.

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?

All 5 parameters have schema descriptions, so baseline is 3. The description adds defaults (days: 90, limit: 50) and constraints (max: 200, default namespace 0), adding value beyond the schema.

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 'Find pages that haven't been edited in a specified number of days.' It distinguishes from siblings by explicitly listing use cases and alternatives in 'USE WHEN' and 'NOT FOR' sections.

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The description provides explicit 'USE WHEN' examples (e.g., 'find outdated pages') and 'NOT FOR' directives, referencing specific sibling tools like mediawiki_get_recent_changes and mediawiki_find_orphaned_pages.

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