update-page-by-id

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavioral traits. It only says 'Update a page by its ID,' which implies mutation but does not clarify whether it is a partial or full update, what permissions are required, side effects on existing attributes, or response behavior. This is a significant gap for a write operation.

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 sentence that is grammatically clear and front-loads the verb and object. It is very concise with zero wasted words, though it borders on under-specification. Given the emphasis on avoiding bloat, this structure earns a 4.

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?

The tool is complex—6 top-level parameters, a nested attributes object, and no output schema—yet the description provides only a one-line overview. There is no mention of the request payload format, update semantics, or typical use cases, making it severely incomplete for an agent to invoke 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?

The description adds no parameter-level meaning. The schema has 50% coverage, with descriptions for pageID, type, and template, but the 'name' parameter has a confusing title 'ID' that is not clarified, and 'attributes' and 'description' lack descriptions entirely. The description fails to compensate for these gaps or help the agent understand parameter roles.

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 the action (update) and resource (a page), with the ID as the locator. However, it does not specify which aspects of the page can be updated (e.g., type, template, attributes), nor does it differentiate from the sibling tool update_page_content, so it falls short of a high specificity score.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, no context for appropriate scenarios, and no exclusions. It is a single statement without any usage direction, which offers minimal help in tool selection.

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