duplicate_page

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

No annotations provided, so the description carries the full burden. It transparently discloses that unsupported block types are omitted and listed in a warnings field, that Notion AI meeting notes are converted to ordinary blocks with a warning, and that subpage duplication is not supported. This goes beyond basic functionality, though it does not cover auth or rate limits, which are less critical for a duplication 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?

The description is a single long paragraph containing multiple details. While clear, it could be more concise or restructured (e.g., bullet points for warnings and limitations). The front-loading is adequate with the main action first.

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?

The description covers the core behavior and limitations but does not explicitly describe the return value (e.g., the new page object or warnings field). Given no output schema, more detail on the output structure would be beneficial for completeness.

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?

Input schema has 100% description coverage, so parameters are already clear. The description adds value by explaining the fallback behavior for parent_page_id (source's parent, then create_page resolution). This provides 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 it duplicates a page by reading blocks and creating a new page with the same content. It distinguishes from siblings like create_page (empty page creation) and move_page (moving, not copying), and highlights limitations (unsupported block types, subpages).

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 implicitly indicates use for copying pages but does not explicitly state when not to use it or name alternative tools. It notes that deep-duplication of subpages is unsupported, which provides some guidance, but lacks explicit when-to-use or when-to-avoid scenarios.

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