update_page

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

There are no annotations to provide safety or mutation context. The description only states the action and fields, but does not disclose whether updates are partial, what happens on missing pages, or any permission requirements. For a mutating tool with no annotation support, this leaves important behavioral gaps.

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 front-loads the verb and resource, and lists the relevant fields. Every word contributes meaning, with no redundancy or filler.

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 simple and the schema fully describes parameters, so the description doesn't need to detail return values. However, given the closely related sibling update_page_content, the description could explicitly clarify that content updates are out of scope. No behavioral notes (e.g., idempotency) are provided, making it merely adequate.

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 input schema has 100% description coverage for all four parameters. The description adds only a grouping term 'metadata' over what the schema provides, so the baseline of 3 applies. No extra parameter-level semantics are introduced.

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 verb 'Update' and the resource 'a page's metadata', listing the specific fields (title, icon, parent). This distinguishes it from the sibling tool update_page_content by specifying it handles metadata, not content.

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?

No explicit guidance is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The sibling list includes update_page_content, and while the purpose clarity implies a distinction, the description does not directly state 'for content use update_page_content' or any other exclusions.

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