Search pages

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions that matching pages are returned with certain fields, but does not disclose pagination, ordering, authentication needs, or rate limits. The description adds some context but is not rich in behavioral details.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose, and includes a useful pointer to get_page. There is no wasted wording or redundant 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 that there is an output schema, the description does not need to detail return structures. It covers the tool's purpose and gives a relevant follow-up action. It is complete enough for a straightforward search tool, though minor aspects like result limits are not mentioned.

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 has 100% parameter description coverage, so the baseline is 3. The description does not add any additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema already provides, such as examples or formatting rules.

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 verb 'search' and the resource 'Wiki.js pages', specifying it does full-text search. It also lists the return fields (id, title, path, locale), which distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_pages (which lists all pages) and get_page (which fetches content).

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 clear context for using search_pages (full-text search) and explicitly suggests using get_page to fetch content, which is a helpful downstream instruction. However, it does not explicitly compare to list_pages or state when to use search over listing, so it lacks explicit exclusions.

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