list-wikis

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the returned fields and implies a read-only operation via the verb 'List', but does not explicitly state that it has no side effects or describe any potential error conditions or output format beyond the listed attributes.

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?

A single, well-structured sentence that front-loads the purpose and immediately provides actionable guidance. Every word adds value, with no 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?

For a zero-parameter listing tool with no annotations or output schema, the description is reasonably complete. It covers what is listed and when to use it, but could optionally mention absence of side effects or whether wikis are sorted.

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 tool has zero parameters and an empty input schema, so parameter documentation is not needed. The description adds value by explaining what the output contains (URLs, auth status, default), which is useful for the agent.

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 lists all registered wikis and specifies the returned attributes (URLs, auth status, default). It is distinct from sibling tools like add-wiki and remove-wiki, which modify wikis, and search tools, which operate on pages.

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 gives explicit when-to-use guidance: 'Call this first if you're unsure which wikis are available.' It does not explicitly name alternatives or when-not scenarios, but the context makes it clear this is the initial discovery tool.

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