page_set

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

With no annotations provided, the description fully bears the burden of revealing behavioral traits. It explains that the tool switches pages and hints at a constraint (some operations depend on the current page). However, it omits details like whether the switch is instantaneous, or any side effects like state changes or errors for invalid pages.

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?

Two short sentences, no wasted words. The description is front-loaded with the core action and immediately provides the list of valid values, making it easy to parse quickly.

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's simplicity (one parameter, no output schema), the description covers the essential aspects: what it does and which values are accepted. It could mention return behavior or error handling, but these are not critical for a straightforward page-switch 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?

The input schema has 0% description coverage and no enum constraint, but the description adds critical meaning by enumerating the allowed page values (media, cut, edit, fusion, color, fairlight, deliver). This compensates for the schema gap, though it does not describe other possible parameter behavior (e.g., case sensitivity).

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 'Switch Resolve to a page,' which is a specific verb-resource pair. It lists the exact pages available (media, cut, edit, fusion, color, fairlight, deliver), making the tool's purpose unmistakable. This distinguishes it from siblings like page_get, which retrieves the current page.

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 implicitly indicates when to use this tool (before operations that require a specific page) by noting 'Some operations only work while the matching page is open.' However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternative tools, leaving some ambiguity about selection logic.

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