Get Page

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is well covered. The description adds no behavioral nuance beyond labeling the operation as a 'get,' but it does not contradict the annotations either.

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, front-loaded sentence with no filler. The parenthetical '(slide)' adds useful disambiguation without unnecessary length.

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 low complexity, a complete output schema, fully documented parameters, and strong annotations, the description is sufficient for an agent to select and invoke the tool correctly. It does not need to explain return values because the output schema covers them.

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 100%, with all three parameters documented in the input schema. The description adds no parameter-specific details, so it does not compensate beyond the schema's baseline coverage.

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 states a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('details about a specific page (slide) in a presentation'), making the tool's purpose immediately clear. It naturally distinguishes itself from presentation-level siblings like get_presentation and thumbnail-oriented get_page_thumbnail by specifying 'details' about a 'specific 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?

The description gives clear context: this tool is for retrieving a single page/slide's details rather than the whole presentation. It does not explicitly name alternatives or say when not to use it, so it lacks explicit exclusion guidance, but the scope is unambiguous enough for a simple getter.

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