apex_describe_page

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

Annotations already declare this as a read-only, idempotent, non-destructive operation. The description adds that output is in human-readable text, which gives some context on output format, but no further behavioral details such as pagination or depth of component listing. It does not contradict 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 a single, concise sentence with no redundant words. It is front-loaded with the action and resource.

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 simplicity, the description, schema, and annotations cover essential aspects. The output schema exists, so return values are specified elsewhere. However, 'components' is somewhat ambiguous and could be clarified to indicate whether it includes regions, items, processes, etc., which would help distinguish from more specific list tools.

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% with descriptions for both app_id and page_id. The description does not add additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema already provides. Baseline 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 clearly states the tool's function: describing a page's components in human-readable text. The verb 'describe' and the target resource 'a page's components' are specific, and the output format is noted. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like apex_list_pages or apex_describe_table.

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 when a human-readable overview of a page's components is needed, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool instead of alternatives like apex_get_page_details or apex_list_regions. No exclusions or alternative mentions are provided. Usage guidance is implied rather than explicit.

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