moodle_wiki_scaffold

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full responsibility for disclosing behavior. It only mentions the action 'Create/update' without explaining side effects (e.g., whether existing stubs are overwritten), prerequisites beyond a downloaded course, or what a wiki stub is. This is insufficient for a mutation tool.

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 redundant phrases. Every word earns its place, making it highly concise.

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 tool with 3 optional parameters, no schema descriptions, and no annotations, this description is too sparse. It fails to explain what wiki stubs are, how they are created/updated, and the purpose of the 'out' parameter. While an output schema exists, it does not compensate for the lack of essential context.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It mentions 'by path or course_id' which maps to course_dir and course_id, but the 'out' parameter is left unexplained. Thus it partially covers the parameters but misses one, providing inadequate semantics for a tool with zero schema help.

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 action ('Create/update _wiki stubs') and its target resource (downloaded course, identified by path or course_id). This specific verb+resource combination distinguishes it from sibling tools like moodle_wiki_status and moodle_wiki_rebuild_index.

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 implies usage context: it operates on a downloaded course, so the course must be downloaded first. This gives a clear prerequisite but does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use the tool, falling short of a 5.

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