Get a space revision page by its path

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

Annotations (readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint) already convey that this is a safe, idempotent read operation. The description adds no additional behavioral context (e.g., rate limits, permissions, error handling). It does not contradict annotations.

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 concise sentence, effectively front-loading the purpose and including the HTTP method and URL pattern for direct context. No unnecessary 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?

There is no output schema, and the description does not hint at what the response contains (e.g., page metadata, content). For a tool that returns data, this is a notable gap that reduces 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?

Schema coverage is 100%: each parameter has a clear description in the input schema. The description adds no extra meaning beyond what is already specified. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 action (Get) and resource (a space revision page by its path). It includes the HTTP method and URL pattern, which distinguishes it from siblings like gitbook_get_page_by_path (no revision context) and gitbook_get_page_in_revision_by_id (by ID instead of path).

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 when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance is provided. Among many sibling tools for fetching pages (by path, by ID, in revisions, in change requests), the description offers no differentiation criteria or context for selection.

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