Add a new page to an InDesign document at the end or relative to an existing page, and assign a master page to control its layout.
Add a new page to the document
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| position | No | end | |
| pageIndex | No | Reference page index (for before/after) | |
| masterPage | No | Master page to apply |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the full burden for behavioral disclosure, but it only states the action without mentioning side effects, default position, or permission requirements. It is minimal and doesn't reveal important context.
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, front-loaded sentence with no extraneous content. It is appropriately concise.
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 mutates a document and has no annotations or output schema, the description is insufficient. It fails to mention that pages can be added before/after specific pages, the default of appending to the end, or how masterPage affects the new page.
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?
The description adds no insight into the parameters. While the schema provides descriptions for pageIndex and masterPage and an enum for position, the description itself doesn't help clarify parameter usage beyond what is already in 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 'Add a new page to the document' uses a specific verb and resource, clearly indicating the action. It distinguishes from sibling tools like delete_page and duplicate_page by specifying 'add' rather than other operations.
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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as duplicate_page or navigate_to_page. The description lacks context about prerequisites or scenarios.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.