新建白板页面

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

Annotations already declare the safety profile (readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=false, destructiveHint=false), so the bar is lower. The description does add one genuinely useful trait beyond annotations — the new page is made the current page, which changes editor state. It says nothing about versioning requirements or permission needs, so it remains a partial disclosure.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence with zero filler — the action and its immediate side effect are stated first. It is efficient, though arguably terse given the gaps noted elsewhere.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained, and annotations cover the safety profile. What is missing is the routing distinction from whiteboard_manage_pages and any signal about the undocumented name parameter, which leaves the definition only minimally sufficient for a mutating create 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 description coverage is 67%, and the description contributes no parameter information at all. The 'name' parameter has no schema description and no description coverage, leaving it entirely undocumented, while boardId and expectedVersion semantics live only 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?

States a specific verb and resource (create a new page) plus scope (in the specified whiteboard) and a side effect (it becomes the current page). It does not, however, distinguish itself from the sibling whiteboard_manage_pages, which plausibly also manipulates pages, so an agent cannot fully route on purpose alone.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance and no named alternative, despite whiteboard_manage_pages sitting in the same sibling list and likely overlapping in capability. The agent is left to infer whether page creation belongs to this tool or the manage_pages tool.

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