Notion MCP Server

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. 'Update page properties' implies a write/mutation operation, but it doesn't disclose important traits: whether this requires specific permissions, if changes are reversible, what happens to unspecified properties, rate limits, or error conditions. The description adds no behavioral context beyond the basic action implied by 'Update'.

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 at just 4 words ('Notion | Update page properties'). It's front-loaded with the essential action and context, with zero wasted words. Every element (platform, action, resource) earns its place, making it easy for an agent to parse quickly.

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 mutation tool with 6 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is inadequate. It doesn't explain what constitutes successful completion, what gets returned (if anything), error scenarios, or the scope of 'page properties' updates. The high schema coverage helps, but for a write operation with complex nested parameters, more contextual guidance is needed.

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 high at 83%, providing good documentation for most parameters. The description adds no parameter-specific information beyond what's in the schema - it doesn't explain what 'page properties' encompasses or provide examples of property updates. With high schema coverage, the baseline score of 3 is appropriate as the description doesn't add meaningful semantic value beyond the schema.

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 resource ('page properties') with the Notion context. It distinguishes from siblings like API-create-a-database or API-post-page by focusing on updating existing pages rather than creating new ones. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from API-update-a-block or API-update-a-database which also perform updates on different resources.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention when to choose this over API-update-a-block (for block-level updates) or API-retrieve-a-page (for read-only access), nor does it specify prerequisites like needing a valid page_id. The agent must infer usage from the name and schema alone.

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