get_page

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It does disclose the id-over-path precedence rule and that a JSON-compatible page is returned, but says nothing about behavior on a missing/nonexistent page, permissions, or how content vs metadata are distinguished.

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?

Front-loaded one-line purpose followed by compact Args/Returns sections; every line earns its place. Slight redundancy with the input schema for the parameter names, but nothing is wasted.

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?

For a read-only single-item fetch with an output schema present, the description need not explain return structure, and it correctly focuses on selectors and scoping. The main omission is behavior when the page is not found or when neither selector is supplied.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description is the only source of parameter meaning, and it delivers: id is 'Page identifier' and path is 'Slash-separated page path,' plus the precedence rule. It stops short of format examples (e.g., whether path omits leading slash) that would make it 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 a specific verb (Get) and resource (page) and names both lookup selectors, so an agent immediately knows this is a single-item retrieval tool. It does not explicitly contrast itself with siblings like find_page_by_title or lookup_path, which keeps it from a 5.

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 only guidance is 'id preferred when both selectors are supplied,' which resolves parameter conflict rather than when-to-use-this-tool. There is no mention of when to prefer get_page over search_pages, find_page_by_title, or lookup_path, so tool selection is left entirely to inference.

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