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

Annotations already declare destructive=false/idempotent=false/readOnly=false, and the description usefully adds that the page starts UNPUBLISHED and which identifiers are returned. It does not mention what happens on slug collision, required permissions, or whether publishing must follow as a separate call — meaningful gaps for a mutating tool.

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?

Three tight sentences, front-loaded with the verb and the created resource's initial state. The return-value sentence earns its place because there is no output schema; nothing is padding.

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 10-parameter mutation with no output schema and zero schema descriptions, the description covers the unusual bits (FAQ object shape, initial UNPUBLISH state, returned IDs) but omits which parameters are required, whether website id or uuid takes precedence, and slug-uniqueness behavior.

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 coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate; it only covers three of ten parameters (website id/uuid and the FAQ entry shape). The remaining seven (title, content, slug, poster, keywords, language, description) are left to bare property names, with no defaults or format hints explained.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ("Create a new seliee_page") and scopes it to a target website via id or uuid, so the agent knows exactly what is produced. It does not differentiate from siblings like edit_page or create_article, but the core purpose is 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?

There is no guidance on when to use this versus edit_page, create_article, or create_collection, and no stated prerequisites or exclusions. The when-to-use must be inferred from the verb alone.

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