create_page

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits, but it only states the action. It fails to mention side effects (modifying a doc), required permissions, error conditions, or confirmation of creation. This leaves the agent with incomplete understanding of the tool's impact.

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 sentence that front-loads the main purpose and lists options. It is reasonably concise and free of extraneous text, though slightly dense with multiple optional features.

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's complexity (7 parameters, nested content schemas), the description is incomplete. It does not explain the output schema (response), how to use the 'page_content' parameter's sub-types (canvas vs embed), or constraints (required fields). More detailed context is needed for effective use.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It names several parameters (subtitle, icon, parent page, content) but does not explain 'doc_id' or 'name' (both required and crucial). The mention of 'initial HTML/markdown content' adds value for 'page_content' but overall semantic clarity is partial.

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 ('create a new page'), the resource ('in a Coda doc'), and lists key optional features (subtitle, icon, parent page, initial content). This specificity distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'update_page' or 'list_pages'.

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 usage guidelines are provided. The description does not indicate when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'update_page', nor does it mention prerequisites (e.g., doc existence) or scenarios where this tool is appropriate.

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