select_page

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true. The description adds a useful behavioral cue by indicating that selection affects future tool calls, implying a session-state change. It does not elaborate on side effects such as whether previous context is cleared, making the transparency moderate.

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 clear sentence that front-loads the action and purpose, containing no filler or redundant information. It is perfectly sized for a tool with one parameter and a straightforward behavior.

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 simple one-parameter tool with annotations and full schema coverage, the description is nearly complete: it defines the action, outcome, and implies usage sequence. It could be more explicit about the reset behavior or how it interacts with sibling tools like navigate_page, but this is a minor gap.

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%: pageIdx is documented with its role and a pointer to list_pages. The tool description adds no additional parameter meaning beyond the schema, which already provides adequate guidance, so the baseline score of 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 'Select a page as a context for future tool calls' uses a specific verb, identifies the resource ('page'), and states the purpose ('context for future tool calls'). This distinguishes it clearly from sibling tools like list_pages (listing) and navigate_page (navigating).

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 implies usage as a preliminary step before other calls ('for future tool calls'), and the parameter description instructs to call list_pages to get the index. However, it does not explicitly contrast with alternatives or specify when not to use it, leaving some ambiguity.

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