Get page

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It adds meaningful behavioral details: pages are addressed by Space.PageName, bare names fail, and long pages are truncated with an explicit marker. These go beyond a simple 'read a page' statement, though it does not mention error or auth behavior.

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?

Three compact sentences, each earning its place. The main purpose is front-loaded, followed by reference sourcing guidance and a behavioral note about truncation. No redundant or filler content.

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 single-parameter read operation with a fully documented schema, the description covers purpose, reference format, reference sourcing, and truncation behavior. It does not describe the exact return format or not-found behavior, but given the low complexity 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?

The schema already provides 100% coverage for pageRef, so the baseline is 3. The description adds value beyond the schema by giving concrete examples and emphasizing the Space.PageName format and the bare-name restriction, which helps agents construct valid inputs.

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's content by its reference') and distinguishes it from the sibling list/search tools by focusing on content retrieval for a single page. Concrete examples like 'Onboarding.Checklist' and 'Main.WebHome' make the intended use immediately clear.

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?

It explicitly tells the agent to obtain the reference from search_pages or list_pages_in_space, and warns that a bare page name without a space is not addressable. This gives strong usage context, though it does not explicitly list when-not-to-use scenarios or name alternative tools for other cases.

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