moodle_wiki_status

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

With no annotations provided, the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It only states that the tool 'shows' status, implying a read-only operation, but does not explain what 'ready' vs 'pending' means, whether it requires a local setup, or any other side effects or dependencies. No annotations exist to compensate.

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 concise sentence, front-loaded with the core action and resource. Every word earns its place, with no redundant information or filler.

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 the tool has 3 optional parameters, no annotations, and exists within a large sibling set, the one-sentence description is insufficient. It lacks parameter explanations, usage context, and behavioral details. The presence of an output schema mitigates return value documentation, but the description still fails to cover essential aspects for correct invocation.

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 schema has 0% description coverage, so the description must compensate. It does not explain the purpose of parameters like 'out', 'course_id', or 'course_dir'. The only indirect connection is 'local course', but no explicit mapping is provided. The parameter names offer some inference, but the description adds no semantic value.

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 function with a specific verb ('Show') and resource ('wiki cards'), and distinguishes ready vs pending states. It is unambiguous and differentiates from sibling tools like moodle_wiki_scaffold and moodle_wiki_rebuild_index, which perform different actions.

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 use this tool vs alternatives. The description only describes what it does without mentioning conditions, prerequisites, or exclusions. The context implies it's for checking wiki status, but there is no explicit 'when to use' or 'when not to use' information.

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