list_page_modules

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the public anon key auth requirement and indicates that records are included in the result ('with their records'), which adds behavioral context beyond the tool name. However, it does not describe return shape or pagination behavior.

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, front-loaded sentence: verb, resource, and scope appear immediately, with the auth context appended in a parenthetical. No unnecessary words or repetition.

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 (one parameter, no output schema), and the description covers core purpose and auth context. However, it lacks explicit guidance on how this differs from list_modules_editor, leaves page_id format ambiguous, and does not clarify how records are represented in the response.

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 only parameter, page_id, has 0% schema description coverage. The description merely reuses the word 'page' ('on a page') and does not explain the expected format, type, or how the value maps to a page resource beyond the property name, leaving the agent to guess.

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 ('List') and resource ('modules on a page') and adds a distinctive detail ('with their records'), making it easy to distinguish from get_module (single item) and list_modules_editor (editor context).

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 parenthetical 'public, anon key auth' provides clear context for when this tool should be used (public/anonymous access), but it does not explicitly contrast with the sibling list_modules_editor or state when not to use it.

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