coda_list_pages

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

No annotations are provided, and the description does not disclose whether this is a read-only operation, what fields are returned, or any side effects. It only mentions pagination, which is minimal.

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 short sentence with no filler words. It's appropriately concise, though it sacrifices informative content.

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 no output schema and sparse descriptions, the tool description fails to explain what page data is returned (e.g., titles, IDs, hierarchy). It also doesn't clarify pagination behavior beyond a token. An agent would lack sufficient context to predict the output or handle errors.

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 input schema already documents all three parameters (docId, limit, nextPageToken) with coverage at 100%. The description adds 'with pagination' which reinforces the limit/nextPageToken usage but adds no new semantic detail.

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 indicates the action (list) and resource (pages), but refers to 'current document' despite the required docId parameter, creating slight ambiguity. It distinguishes from sibling tools like coda_list_documents by specifying pages.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool vs alternatives like coda_list_documents or coda_get_page_content. The description lacks any 'use this when...' or 'instead of...' language.

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