get_page

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

There are no annotations, and the description only restates the operation; it does not disclose read-only guarantees, required permissions, response format, or error behavior. The word 'Get' implies a read operation, but that is not explicit behavioral disclosure.

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 a single front-loaded sentence with no wasted words, which is appropriately concise for a simple getter. It loses a point only because it offers no additional scoping or routing context that would make the line more informative.

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?

With two well-documented parameters and no output schema, the description is minimally usable: an agent can infer that course_id and url_or_id identify the page to retrieve. However, without annotations or any mention of return values or error cases, the definition is thin and relies entirely on the schema for completeness.

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?

The input schema already documents both required parameters with concise descriptions ('Course ID' and 'Page URL slug or ID'), giving 100% schema coverage. The description adds no parameter semantics beyond the schema, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 identifies a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('wiki page'), making the tool's role as a single-page reader clear and distinct from list_pages or create_page. It does not name sibling tools or mention the course scope, which keeps it from a 5.

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?

No guidance is given on when to choose this tool over sibling tools such as list_pages or get_file, nor are any exclusions or prerequisites stated. The intended use is only implied by the verb and resource.

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