wiki_listLists wiki pages or raw sources with summaries, 50 per call; use offset to retrieve additional results.
List wiki pages (folder="wiki", default) or raw sources (folder="raw") with their summaries. 50 per call; use offset for more.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| folder | No | "wiki" (default) or "raw". | |
| offset | No | Start position for the next page of results (default 0). | |
| sandbox_id | Yes | Your sandbox id from wiki_start. |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With readOnlyHint=true already covering safety, the description adds real behavior: fixed page size of 50, offset-based continuation, and that entries include summaries. It doesn't mention ordering or whether a total count is returned.
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?
Two sentences, mode selection first, pagination second; nothing extraneous.
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?
For a simple read-only listing tool with full schema coverage and annotations, this covers the essentials: modes, default, page size, and continuation. Only result ordering and truncation behavior are left unstated.
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%, so folder enum, its default, and offset semantics are already documented. The description restates the default but adds no syntax or constraint detail beyond the schema, which is the expected baseline.
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?
States a specific verb and resource (list wiki pages / raw sources) and names what the results carry (summaries). It doesn't explicitly contrast with sibling list-like tools such as wiki_search or wiki_read, so an agent must infer that distinction.
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 default folder and the pagination rule ('50 per call; use offset for more') imply how to page through everything, but there is no guidance on when to choose this over wiki_search or wiki_read.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.