Create Semantic Page

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

No annotations are provided, and the description fails to disclose behavioral details such as side effects, permissions, error conditions, or what 'intentional section structure' and 'native block composition' mean. The description is too vague to understand the tool's behavior beyond creation.

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 a single sentence that is efficient and front-loaded. However, it could be split for clarity and to separately convey the core action and the context of 'intentional section structure'.

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 complexity (5 params, no output schema, no annotations), the description is too brief. It does not explain the return value, default behaviors when sections are omitted, or how it differs from other creation tools among the many siblings.

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 80% (4 of 5 parameters have descriptions). The tool description does not add parameter-specific meaning beyond the schema. Baseline is 3, and no extra value is provided.

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 an AFFiNE-native page with intentional section structure and native block composition. This distinguishes it from siblings like create_doc or create_doc_from_markdown by emphasizing structured, native 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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives (e.g., create_doc, append_semantic_section). The description implies use for structured pages but does not provide exclusionary criteria or comparisons.

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