Pages

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry full weight. It mentions 'switch the active page' implying mutation, but lacks detail on side effects, permissions, or boundaries. The return data is noted, but behavioral traits are insufficiently disclosed.

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 concise sentences with clear action enumeration and return description. No filler, but could list parameters more explicitly.

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 has 5 parameters and 3 actions, with no output schema. The description vaguely states return values but omits boardId and does not detail action-specific behavior or parameter dependencies. Barely adequate given the complexity.

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 40% (only name and pageId have descriptions). The description adds context by mentioning 'active page id' and 'session binding', aiding understanding of pageId and sessionId, but boardId remains unexplained. Partially compensates for low 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 specifies the tool manages board pages with three explicit actions (list, create, switch) and states the return values. This differentiates it from sibling tools like convyy_draw or convyy_analyze, but the verb 'Manage' is somewhat generic.

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 usage through the action enum, but provides no explicit guidance on when to choose this tool over siblings or any prerequisites. It tells what the tool does but not when to use it.

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