notion-full-mcp

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

read_page_deep

Read-only

Recursively reads a Notion page and all nested blocks, including sub-lists, toggles, and table rows, returning full content as Markdown or JSON.

Instructions

Read a Notion page with all nested children recursively.

Args: page_id: The Notion page ID. max_depth: Maximum nesting depth to fetch (default 5). format: Output format - 'markdown' for readable text, 'json' for full block tree.

Returns full document content including nested blocks like sub-lists, toggle contents, and table rows.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "page_id": "<page_id>"
    },
    "name": "read_page_deep"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Default
`format`	No	markdown
`page_id`	Yes
`max_depth`	No

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.3.1May 27, 2026

TDQS

A3.6/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so safety is covered. The description adds useful behavior beyond that: recursion with a default depth of 5, two output formats, and that nested sub-lists, toggles and table rows are included. It omits what happens at the depth limit (truncation vs error) and any warning about large payloads from deep recursion.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Front-loaded with the one-sentence purpose, then a compact Args block and a return summary. The docstring-style layout is slightly formal but each line carries information; no redundant restatement of the title.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be spelled out, though the description summarizes them anyway. For a 3-parameter recursive read it is nearly complete; the only gap is unspecified behavior when max_depth is hit or when the page is large.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must carry the burden and largely does: page_id is identified as the Notion page ID, max_depth is explained with its default of 5, and format is given the two meaningful values 'markdown' vs 'json'. The schema has no enum on format, so the description is the only source of that constraint; the page_id format (UUID vs URL) is still undefined.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb and resource ('Read a Notion page') plus the distinguishing scope 'with all nested children recursively', which separates it from block-level or info-level siblings. It does not name any sibling explicitly, so the differentiation is inferred from the recursive scope rather than stated.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance and no named alternatives such as get_page_info or list_block_children. Usage is only implied by the phrase 'recursively', which suggests this is the heavy full-document reader rather than a shallow lookup.

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