manage_wiki

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

No annotations provided, so description must convey behavior. It fails to disclose that actions like create/update/delete are mutating, nor does it mention concurrency control via 'version' parameter, permissions, or reversibility. The term 'Manage' is vague for a tool with destructive operations.

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?

One sentence plus a list of actions is very concise. It is front-loaded with the main purpose. However, the list could be better formatted for readability.

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 bundles 6 actions with 6 parameters and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It does not explain return values for each action, relationships between actions, or error scenarios. A more detailed description would be expected for a multi-operation tool.

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 covers 100% of parameters with descriptions, so baseline is 3. The description emphasizes 'markdown-native,' which adds value but is already implied by the content parameter description. It does not clarify the difference between 'list' and 'list_pages' or provide additional semantic context beyond the schema.

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 it manages Azure DevOps wiki pages and lists all available actions. However, it does not differentiate between 'list' and 'list_pages', which could be ambiguous (list wikis vs list pages). Still, it is specific enough to understand the resource and operations.

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 on when to use this tool vs alternatives (e.g., manage_work_items for other content). No prerequisites or conditions are mentioned. The description merely lists actions without usage context.

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