Easy Notion MCP

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It mentions reading blocks and creating a new page, implying a write operation, but doesn't disclose behavioral traits like permissions needed, whether it's idempotent, rate limits, or what happens on failure. It adds minimal context beyond the basic action.

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 appropriately sized and front-loaded: it starts with the core action 'Duplicate a page' and follows with essential details in a single, efficient sentence. Every word earns its place, with no redundancy or unnecessary elaboration.

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 has no annotations and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It covers the basic operation but lacks details on behavioral aspects (e.g., permissions, error handling) and return values. For a mutation tool with 3 parameters, more context is needed to ensure safe and effective use.

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 schema already documents all parameters. The description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema provides, such as explaining interactions between parameters or edge cases. Baseline 3 is appropriate as the schema handles parameter documentation adequately.

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's purpose: 'Duplicate a page' specifies the verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings like 'create_page' by mentioning it reads from a source and creates a copy, but doesn't explicitly differentiate from 'copy_page' if that existed. It's specific but could be more precise about uniqueness among siblings.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention when to choose 'duplicate_page' over 'create_page' or 'copy_page' (if available), nor does it specify prerequisites or exclusions. Usage is implied from the action but lacks explicit context.

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