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

With no annotations, the description must carry the behavioral burden. 'Get' and 'including all its blocks' communicate a read operation and the main payload, but the description does not explain response shape, whether blocks are returned flat or recursively/nested, error behavior for missing IDs, or size/pagination implications. These are meaningful gaps for a tool with no output schema.

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 entire description is one front-loaded sentence with no filler. Every clause contributes: the operation, the identifying key, and the return scope.

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 single-parameter, read-only tool, the description contains the core facts needed to select and invoke it: it targets a page by ID and returns the page's blocks. The lack of an output schema makes some return-shape ambiguity unavoidable, but 'including all its blocks' sets the right expectation; the main omission is explicit routing to sibling tools, which is already penalized under usage guidelines.

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 100%, and the schema already defines page_id as 'The UUID of the page,' so the description need not repeat it. The phrase 'by ID' merely reinforces the schema and adds no new format, constraints, or relationship guidance.

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 uses a concrete verb and resource: 'Get a specific page by ID' and immediately scopes the output to 'all its blocks.' This lets an agent distinguish it from sibling tools like get_page_summary and get_page_tree, which imply summary or hierarchy rather than full block content.

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 the right context—use when you already have a page UUID and need the page's block content—but it never states when to prefer it over get_page_summary, get_page_tree, or search_pages, nor does it give exclusions. Without explicit alternative routing, the agent must infer intent from the name and the phrase 'by ID.'

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