get_page

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It explains format selection and cache behavior (via useCache in schema), but does not mention potential errors, permissions, or output structure. Output schema exists, so return format is covered.

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?

Description is well-structured: starts with purpose, then format details and alternative tool. Every sentence adds value; 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 4 parameters (1 required) and an output schema, description covers core functionality well. However, does not mention useCache or includeMetadata parameters (though schema covers them) and could briefly note caching behavior. Overall complete for content retrieval.

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%, but description adds value by reinforcing format guidance ('非必要不要传此参数') and explaining wikitext vs html. For pageName, it confirms Chinese language support, consistent with 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?

Description clearly states verb '获取' and resource 'Minecraft 中文 Wiki 页面的内容', specifying exactly what the tool retrieves. It distinguishes from sibling tools like check_page_exists (existence check) and search_wiki (searching).

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 guides when to use wikitext vs html format, and advises using search_wiki for template documentation. Provides clear context for tool selection.

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