Create Semantic Page

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

Annotations already indicate a write operation (readOnlyHint false), non-destructive (destructiveHint false), and non-idempotent (idempotentHint false). The description adds minimal context with 'AFFiNE-native' and 'native block composition', but does not disclose additional behavioral traits such as side effects on workspace structure, permissions required, or how sections are created. This aligns with the annotations and adds slight value, but not enough for a higher score.

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 concise sentence that is front-loaded with the primary action ('Create an AFFiNE-native page') and adds a brief qualifier. Every word contributes, and there is no redundancy or 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 the tool has 5 parameters, an enum, and a specific semantic purpose, the description is too thin to fully inform selection and invocation. It does not explain the significance of pageType templates, the role of sections, or when to use this instead of create_doc or append_semantic_section. The schema provides parameter details, but the description does not provide the higher-level context needed for appropriate use.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description does not add any extra meaning about the parameters beyond what the schema already provides. It mentions 'intentional section structure' which loosely maps to sections/pageType, but does not elaborate on how parameters interact or any parameter-specific constraints.

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 creates an AFFiNE-native page, and the phrase 'intentional section structure and native block composition' indicates a structured page creation, distinguishing it from a plain doc creation. However, it never directly names sibling alternatives like create_doc, so it doesn't explicitly differentiate but is still specific enough.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as create_doc or append_semantic_section. The description provides no context about the intended scenario, no exclusions, and no mention of prerequisites or comparisons to sibling tools.

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