Duplicate Page

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

Beyond the annotations, it discloses exactly what is copied (children, attachments, labels), what is not (comments, history), the resulting title ('Copy of ...' vs. unchanged), and placement semantics. It also notes that clients may prompt the user first, which is valuable non-obvious behavior for a write tool with destructiveHint=false.

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 tight sentences, front-loaded with the core action and its contents, followed by conditional behavior. Dense but every clause carries information; only the client-prompt aside is arguably secondary.

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 an output schema present and annotations covering the safety profile, the description fills the remaining gaps: copy scope, exclusions, naming and destination behavior. An agent has everything needed to call this 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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents both parameters. The description still adds real meaning: target_space_id changes both the destination (top level of that space) and the title convention, which the terse schema text ('Copy into this space instead of the same one') does not convey.

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 a precise verb and resource ('Copy a page') and immediately scopes what is included: child pages, attachments and labels. This clearly separates it from siblings such as create_page, move_page or export_page.

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?

It gives a clear decision rule: omit target_space_id to copy beside the original, supply it to place the copy at the top level of another space. It does not name competing siblings (e.g. move_page_to_space, create_page) or say when duplication is preferable to those, so it stops short of a full 5.

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