Create Page

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

Since no annotations are provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It reveals the import endpoint mechanism, the fact that title is taken from the first heading unless overridden, and that content is optional. These are non-obvious behaviors an agent must know. It lacks permission or error details, but the core mutation behavior is transparently disclosed.

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 concise, with the primary purpose stated in the first sentence and details in a short second paragraph. It is front-loaded with the main action and adds necessary nuance about the import mechanism and title precedence without fluff. This efficient structure makes it easy for an agent to quickly extract the essence.

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 5-parameter tool with only 1 required, the description covers the key behaviors: creation, optional content, title precedence, and the import mechanism. It does not explicitly state what happens when content is null (though default null implies empty page) or mention permissions, but the output schema exists to cover return values. Overall, it provides enough context for an agent to call it correctly.

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 describes all parameters with 100% coverage, so the baseline is 3. The description adds meaning beyond the schema by explaining the interaction between title and content: the title defaults to the first heading of the content unless explicitly provided. This clarifies the title parameter's behavioral semantics and also explains why the format parameter matters, as content is uploaded via import. This added context justifies a score above baseline.

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 the exact action: 'Creates a new page in a space, with or without content.' This is a specific verb and resource, and it clearly distinguishes the tool from update/delete siblings by focusing on creation. It also highlights the key feature of optional content, leaving no ambiguity about what the tool does.

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 does not explicitly name alternatives, but it provides important context: if content is provided, the page is uploaded via the import endpoint, which is the only REST way to persist the page body. This implies usage when content persistence is needed and hints at a constraint. However, it does not say when to avoid this tool or compare it with siblings like update_page, so guidance is implicit rather than explicit.

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