Get page content

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, and the description reinforces the read-only nature. It adds behavioral details like the default text output, HTML option, and maxLength truncation behavior, which are not present in 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 one sentence that is front-loaded with the primary action, then efficiently explains optional parameters and their use cases. No filler or redundant information.

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 is a simple read operation with no output schema, the description covers the parameters, default behavior, and a key use case (modification). It could mention error cases or response format, but the core usage is sufficiently complete.

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?

Although the schema covers all parameters, the description adds meaningful usage semantics: format values are explained, includeIds is tied to modification workflows, and maxLength has a stated default and truncation purpose. This goes beyond the schema's basic descriptions.

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 ('Read one page by ID') and distinguishes this tool from siblings like listPages and searchPages, which operate on collections. It also specifies the default and optional output formats.

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 when to use the tool (reading a specific page by ID) and gives conditional guidance (e.g., use includeIds=true if modifying later). It does not explicitly name alternatives, but sibling names imply the distinction.

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