List Notion pages

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

Annotations already carry readOnlyHint, idempotentHint and destructiveHint=false, and the description reinforces with 'Read-only, free' while adding what annotations cannot express: a connection prerequisite with the exact UI path (Settings > Connectors > Notion) and default result ordering. Pagination behavior beyond the cursor field is not covered, keeping it from a 5.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the purpose, then the return value, then the prerequisite. No filler and no restatement of the title.

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 no output schema, the description correctly fills the gap by saying what identifiers come back and what they feed into, and it notes the connection requirement. For a four-parameter list tool this is nearly complete; only paging-through-results behavior is left implicit.

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 coverage is 75%, so limit and cursor are already documented in the schema and the enum for type is self-explanatory. The description adds only that the query matches words in the title and that results distinguish page ids from database ids. That is meaningful but thin, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Find the Notion pages and databases'), constrains scope ('the user shared with Hermoso'), and specifies ordering ('newest edited first'). It explicitly names the sibling tools that consume its output (save_to_notion, append_to_notion_page, read_notion_page), so an agent can place it in the workflow without opening other schemas.

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 explains the downstream role clearly: it returns the page id those three write/read tools require, or the database id for saving rows. That is real routing guidance. It stops short of stating when NOT to use it or of naming a competing discovery tool among the many list_* siblings, so it lands just below the top.

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