create_page

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

Annotations already indicate readOnly=false and destructive=false, so the description only needs to add extra context. The project_id scoping is useful, but it doesn't disclose return values, permissions, or side effects. This aligns with the get_calls example where annotations cover safety and description adds minimal extra context.

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 one concise sentence with a front-loaded verb and clear conditional structure. No unnecessary words or repetition.

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?

With 11 parameters and no output schema, this description is incomplete. It lacks information on return values, optional parameter behavior, and edge cases. The conditional project_id nuance is helpful but insufficient given the tool's complexity.

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%, and the description only explains project_id. The other 10 parameters (name, description_html, color, access, is_locked, etc.) are left entirely unexplained, leaving the agent to guess their meaning and allowed values.

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 'Create a new page' and distinguishes between project and workspace pages based on project_id. This specific verb-resource pairing differentiates it from sibling create tools like create_project or create_work_item.

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?

Provides conditional guidance on when to use with or without project_id, but does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions. The conditional usage is clear but could be more explicit about when not to use.

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