Notion Describe

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description adds meaningful behavioral context: the tool returns both a schema and a working example, determines which sibling tool executes the operation, and that errors carry the schema, making the describe call skippable for simple operations. This goes beyond the structured annotations without contradicting them.

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?

Two sentences with no filler. The primary return value is stated first, followed by precise usage conditions and an explicit exclusion case. Every clause earns its place.

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 lightweight describe tool with one parameter, clear annotations, and no output schema, the description fully covers what the agent needs: what it returns, when to call it, and when to skip it. The mention of notion_read/notion_write links it to its siblings adequately.

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 coverage is 100% and the single parameter 'operation' is well-documented in the schema. The description adds only marginal semantic value by clarifying that the operation name is 'as listed by notion_read / notion_write', which is useful but largely redundant with the schema description. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 names a specific verb ('Return') and resource ('JSON Schema and a working example for one operation, plus which tool runs it'). It clearly distinguishes this meta-tool from the sibling tools notion_read and notion_write by stating it describes operations rather than performing them.

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?

Explicitly states when to use it ('BEFORE calling the operation when the payload shape is non-trivial'), gives concrete examples of such cases, and explains when it is unnecessary ('For simple ops, just call it'). This is decisive routing guidance with no ambiguity.

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