Update Page

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

The description goes beyond annotations by disclosing important side effects: body REPLACES content, archived:true hides/false restores, omitted fields unchanged. It also explains body formatting. Annotations (readOnlyHint false, idempotentHint true) are consistent and the description enriches 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?

Three concise sentences front-load the primary purpose, then cover key behaviors and usage guidance. No redundant or filler words; every sentence earns its place.

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's moderate complexity (5 params, no output schema), the description fully covers purpose, parameter semantics, side effects, and prerequisite workflow. It is self-contained and actionable for an AI agent.

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?

While the schema covers all 5 parameters at 100%, the description adds crucial semantics: 'body' is plain text with blank lines as paragraph separators, it REPLACES content, and archived behavior is clarified. It also reinforces that only id is required, which is valuable 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 'Update a Page' and enumerates specific actions: rename, set icon, replace body, archive/unarchive. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like create_page, get_page, and list_pages.

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 provides a clear prerequisite: 'Resolve the id via list_pages; only id is required.' This implies when to use the tool (after listing pages) and gives operational guidance. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives like create_page, so it falls short of a 5.

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