Get Page

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint: true, idempotentHint: true, and destructiveHint: false, so the safety profile is known. The description adds minimal extra behavioral context, only confirming it retrieves content and explaining the page_url source. No side effects, return format, or additional behaviors are disclosed, but annotations carry the bulk of the burden.

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 two sentences, front-loading the core purpose and then clarifying the key parameter. Every sentence serves a purpose with no filler or redundancy.

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?

With an output schema present, annotations covering safety, and a simple two-parameter input, the description is sufficient. It addresses purpose, parameter semantics, and prerequisite context, leaving no major gaps for selection or invocation.

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 input schema already provides descriptions for both parameters (page_url and course_id) at 100% coverage. The description adds value by explaining that page_url is a 'slug' and pointing to course_content as the source, which enriches the schema's minimal definition.

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 function: 'Get the content of a Canvas page in a course', specifying the verb, resource, and examples ('syllabus or a weekly overview'). It also differentiates from sibling tools by referencing page_url from course_content, distinguishing it from list-type tools.

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 clear context for use, noting that page_url is the page slug 'available from course_content', implying a prerequisite step. However, it does not explicitly state when to prefer this tool over alternatives or exclude other tools, so it stops short of a full when/when-not guidance.

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