pages_get_metadata

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden. It discloses the return content (SEO, OG, status) but does not mention side effects, error behavior, or permission requirements. 'Get' implies a safe read, but the description does not explicitly state read-only behavior.

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, compact sentence that front-loads the action and resource, with no redundant words or filler.

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?

For a simple read-only metadata tool with well-documented parameters, the description covers the essential function. It could elaborate on the exact response structure, but the absence of an output schema and the straightforward nature keep this at a 4.

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%, so both page_id and localeId are already documented. The description does not add additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema provides, yielding a baseline score.

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 uses the verb 'Get' with the resource 'metadata for a specific page' and lists specific inclusions (SEO settings, Open Graph data, page status), clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like pages_get_content or pages_update_page_settings.

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 (call with a page_id to retrieve metadata) but does not explicitly discuss alternatives or when not to use it. Given the sibling context, the purpose is clear, but no explicit guidance is provided.

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