Save to Notion

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

Annotations only declare the generic write/open-world/non-idempotent profile; the description adds substantial context beyond that: long text is split across blocks rather than truncated, the answer is read back from Notion, the call is free, and it never overwrites. These are real behavioral facts an agent could not infer from the annotations.

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?

One dense but well-ordered paragraph: capability first, content variants next, placement rules after, behavioral guarantees last. Every sentence carries information; it is long but justified by the tool's breadth.

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 8 params, no output schema, and a mutation with open-world side effects, the description covers what an agent needs to call it correctly — content format, placement, non-destructiveness. The only real gap is dataSourceId, which neither schema nor description explains.

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%, and the description meaningfully extends it — explaining markdown syntax handling (headings, lists, links, standalone image/video URLs become media), the swipefileCollection shape, and includeSchedule. It leaves icon, title, and dataSourceId unmentioned, holding it back from a 5.

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 the specific verb and resource (save a NEW page to Notion) and enumerates the concrete content types it accepts: research report, competitor teardown, campaign report, swipefile collection, content calendar. The 'NEW page' framing cleanly separates it from append_to_notion_page and update_doc.

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?

Explains the placement decision tree — parentPageId, databaseId, or omit both for a private workspace page — which tells the agent how to invoke it in each situation. It signals 'never overwrites' so append_to_notion_page is the implied alternative, but it never names the sibling explicitly.

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