Get Page

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, covering the safety profile well. The description adds the behavioral context that it returns the page 'including its layout,' which goes slightly beyond annotations. No contradiction with annotations.

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?

A single clear sentence that communicates the tool's core function with zero wasted words. It's appropriately succinct and front-loaded with the key action.

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?

This is a relatively simple read tool with good annotations and only 2 parameters. However, with 0% schema coverage and no output schema, the description could provide more value by clarifying the pageRef format (slug or id) and what 'layout' means in the return payload. It's functional but leaves the agent inferring some details.

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 0%, so the description carries the full burden for parameter meaning. It mentions 'by slug or id' but doesn't explain which parameter maps to slug vs id (pageRef presumably supports both formats). Neither pageRef nor portalRef is explained in detail, which is a significant gap given zero schema coverage.

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 states what it does: 'Fetch one page (by slug or id) including its layout.' The verb+resource pairing is specific and meaningful. It distinguishes from siblings like kilango_get_page_blocks and kilango_list_pages, though it doesn't explicitly differentiate itself.

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 when to use it (when you need a page's layout), but never names alternatives or says when NOT to use it. With siblings like kilango_get_page_blocks and kilango_list_pages, there's implied context but no explicit guidance on choosing between them.

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