Get page

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true, so safety is covered. The description adds behavioral detail beyond that: it describes the return fields (comment_count, unresolved_comment_count, last_comment_at) and the exact behavior of include_children (returns titles + slugs, no content). No contradiction with 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?

The description is three sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose ('Read a page including its full Markdown content and current version number'), then provides targeted details on optional parameters. Every sentence adds value, with no redundant or vague content.

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 adequately explains return content (Markdown, version, comment counts, optional children/comments). It covers the main behavior and the purpose of each flag, making the tool understandable for an agent. Missing edge cases like errors or pagination, but these are unlikely to be critical for a single-page read tool.

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 already covers all three parameters with descriptions (100% coverage). The description enriches the parameters by explaining when to use include_comments (based on comment_count) and include_children (for folder pages), adding guidance not present in 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 tool reads a page, including full Markdown content and version number. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_pages (which lists pages) and update_page (which modifies), using specific verb+resource language.

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 concrete usage guidance for the optional flags: when comment_count > 0, set include_comments; include_children is recommended for folder pages with empty content that organize sub-pages. It does not explicitly contrast with list_pages, but the read-a-single-page purpose is implied.

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