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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=false, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is known. The description adds no behavioral context beyond restating the operation—no mention of side effects, resulting page state, auto-generation of slug, or interaction with the publishing workflow. It doesn't contradict the annotations, but also adds little beyond them.

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 concise sentence with no filler, front-loading the verb and resource and enumerating the key fields. It is efficient, though it doesn't use the space to add routing or behavior guidance.

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 straightforward create operation, the description is minimally adequate given the rich schema and output schema. However, it lacks explicit guidance on when to select this tool over create_post, and it doesn't clarify the meaning of 'static page' or the prerequisite blogId discovery step, leaving some gaps.

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%, so the baseline is 3. The description simply lists parameter names already documented in the schema and adds no extra meaning, inter-parameter relationships, or format guidance beyond what the schema provides.

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 states a specific verb ('Create') and resource ('static page'), and enumerates the key fields (title, HTML body, metadata, slug, image, status). The phrase 'static page' helps distinguish it from sibling tools like create_post and create_collection, though it doesn't name them explicitly.

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 a use case through 'static page' and the HTML body field, but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like create_post or create_redirect. No exclusions or conditions are given, leaving selection to inference.

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