get_doc_page_listing

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must bear the full burden. It discloses the return includes IDs and hierarchy and mentions v3, but it does not specify behavior on invalid IDs, permission requirements, or rate limits. The description is adequate but not exhaustive.

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 with 11 words, highly concise. Every word adds value (verb, resource, return type, version). No 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?

Given no output schema, the description minimally hints at return structure ('ids + hierarchy') but is insufficient for an agent to fully understand the shape. For a tool with multiple parameters, more detail on output would improve completeness.

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 67% (team_id and doc_id documented). The description does not add parameter-specific details beyond the schema. The undocumented max_page_depth parameter is not explained, though the description's mention of 'hierarchy' loosely suggests depth control.

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 it retrieves the page tree/listing of a Doc including IDs and hierarchy, and specifies version v3. This effectively distinguishes it from siblings like get_doc_page (single page) and get_doc_pages (likely flat list).

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 for hierarchical page structure but lacks explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_doc_pages or search_docs. No 'when not to use' or comparisons are provided.

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