Get a page

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden for behavioral disclosure. It does disclose the size trade-off of full=true ('can be very large'), which is useful operational context. However, it doesn't clarify whether this is a read-only operation, error handling, or what happens with invalid pageIds. Partial transparency but not comprehensive.

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?

Single sentence, front-loaded with the core purpose, and the key caveat about full=true is delivered immediately. Zero wasted words.

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 2-param, no-output-schema tool with no annotations, the description covers the main use and the size warning. However, no guidance on error cases (nonexistent pageId) or relationship to the widget outline structure could help the agent anticipate the response shape. Adequate but minimal for a retrieval tool.

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 100% and both parameters (full, pageId) have descriptions in the schema. The tool description adds meaningful context about the 'full' parameter (explains the trade-off of raw DSL being large vs compact outline), which exceeds the schema's terse 'Return the raw layout DSL instead of an outline.' This justifies the baseline 3.

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?

Clear verb+resource ('Returns a page'), and the description adds the compact-outline vs full-DSL distinction which distinguishes it from generic getters. However, it doesn't explicitly contrast against sibling appsmith_get_widget, though the intent (page vs widget) is implicit in the name.

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 tells when to use full=true vs default outline mode, which is useful usage guidance for a somewhat ambiguous parameter. But it doesn't explicitly state when to use this tool vs alternatives like appsmith_list_pages (enumerate all) or appsmith_get_widget (single widget), leaving some ambiguity.

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