telegraph_create_page

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

With no annotations, the description bears full responsibility. It mentions creation and return of a Page object with URL, but lacks details on authentication needs (implicit via access_token), idempotency, or rate limits. Adequate but not thorough.

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?

Two short sentences that are front-loaded with purpose. No unnecessary words 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?

For a tool with 7 parameters and no output schema, the description provides the core action and return value. However, it could be more complete by noting that access_token must be valid and that content supports multiple formats (though schema already covers format enum). Overall, sufficient for a straightforward creation 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 coverage is 100%, so the schema fully documents parameters. The description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema's descriptions. Baseline 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 tool's action ('Create a new Telegraph page') and its output ('Returns a Page object including the URL'). It effectively distinguishes from sibling tools like telegraph_edit_page and telegraph_get_page.

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 (e.g., telegraph_create_account, telegraph_create_from_template). There is no mention of prerequisites or when not to use it.

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