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

The description openly states that the tool is state-changing and creates the document directly after authorization. This aligns with the annotations (readOnlyHint false, destructiveHint false) and adds useful context about the direct creation behavior without contradiction.

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 concise and well-structured, using only a few sentences to convey purpose, timing, requirements, and the distinction from a sibling tool. No redundant or extraneous information is included.

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 simple input schema and the presence of clear annotations, the description provides sufficient context for an agent to decide when and how to use the tool. It covers the main use case, required inputs, and the relevant alternative 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?

The description highlights the required parameters and notes that space_id is numeric, but does not elaborate on the optional path or parent_id beyond what the schema already provides. Since the schema has 100% coverage with clear descriptions, the added value is moderate.

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 creates a markdown document/page in a Space from provided content, and explicitly distinguishes it from create-space-item, which is for folders or external links. This makes the tool's purpose specific and unambiguous.

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?

It explains when to use the tool (user wants to create a markdown document) and what is required (numeric space_id, title, markdown content). It also explicitly points to create-space-item as the alternative for folders or external links, providing clear usage boundaries.

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