Create page

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the burden of disclosing side effects and constraints. It only mentions a path convention, but does not state what happens on duplicate paths, whether authentication is needed, whether parent folders are auto-created, or any error behavior. For a mutation tool, this is a significant gap.

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 front-loaded: two sentences that state the key purpose and a critical constraint. Every word earns its place, with no filler or 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?

With 9 parameters, low schema coverage, and no annotations, a richer description is needed. The description only addresses the path parameter and ignores other important aspects like editor types, locale defaults, publication/private flags, and content format. Although an output schema exists, its content is not shown, so the description should have explained more about the operation's outcome and caveats.

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 description coverage is only 44%, so the description should compensate. It adds meaningful semantics for the 'path' parameter by explaining the locale rule, which is not in the schema. However, it provides no added value for other parameters like tags, editor, isPrivate, or isPublished, leaving many options under-documented.

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 the tool's verb ('Create') and resource ('Wiki.js page'), which is a specific and unambiguous action. It distinguishes from sibling tools like update_page, delete_page, and move_page by indicating creation of a new page.

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?

It provides clear context for when to use this tool: creating a new page. It also gives a practical formatting guideline about not prefixing the path with locale. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions (e.g., when to use update_page instead), but the purpose is self-evident.

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