surveymonkey_get_page

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries the behavioral burden. It communicates a read-only behavior ('Returns') and names the scope (a specific survey page), but it does not disclose failure behavior, ownership constraints, or any API-specific traits. This is adequate for a simple read operation but not rich.

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 extremely concise and front-loaded with the core purpose, followed by a straightforward parameter list. There is no redundant prose, and the structure makes the required inputs immediately scannable.

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?

With an output schema present, return values do not need to be described. The tool is simple and the two required parameters are named, but the description omits guidance on where the IDs come from and when to use this tool over list_pages. It is minimally viable but leaves some context to be inferred.

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 needed to compensate. It only repeats the parameter names as 'Survey ID' and 'Page ID', which adds little beyond the schema titles and the parameter names themselves. It does not explain how to obtain these IDs, their formats, or that page_id must belong to survey_id.

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 uses a specific verb ('Returns') and resource ('details of a specific survey page'), clearly identifying it as the singleton getter for a page. The word 'specific' plus the required page_id distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_pages, create_page, update_page, and delete_page without ambiguity.

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?

Usage is only implied: if you need the details of one survey page, this tool returns them. It does not explicitly say when not to use it or mention alternatives such as list_pages for enumerating pages or update_page for modifying a page.

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