Jobs-tools-knowledgeBase-getPage

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

With no annotations provided, the description must carry the full burden of disclosing behavioral traits. It implies a read-only operation via 'get' but does not explicitly state its safety, permissions, rate limits, or behavior for missing pages, offering minimal transparency beyond the verb.

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, direct sentence with no wasted words. It front-loads the core action and resource, making it immediately readable and efficiently structured.

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 simple retrieval tool with fully documented parameters, the description is minimally sufficient. However, it omits any mention of return format, error behavior, or how projectId scopes the request, which would be helpful given the absence of an output schema.

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 100% for both parameters ('Page ID' and 'Project ID'), so the baseline is 3. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, such as the relationship between projectId and pageId, but the schema already provides adequate per-parameter clarity.

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 tool gets a page by its ID, using a specific verb and resource. It implicitly distinguishes from sibling tools like getTree or search by specifying the retrieval method, but it does not explicitly contrast itself with alternatives.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus others. The description provides no prerequisites, use cases, or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer usage from the action alone.

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