Skip to main content
Glama

Duplicate Page

notion_duplicate_page

Copy a Notion page with its content, properties, sub-pages, and databases, re-uploading files and offering a dry-run preview.

Instructions

Copy a page with its icon, cover, content (every block type the API can create, with formatting), and, when it stays in the same database, all writable properties. Sub-pages and databases on the page are copied in place; databases get their schema and (by default) their rows with content, with relations inside the copy pointing at the copied rows. Views, linked database views, and read-only blocks are listed as skipped, and the result's status is "partial" when anything was. Database rows keep their own content, sub-pages, and databases. Uploaded files and images are re-uploaded so the copy doesn't depend on expiring links. dry_run shows what would be copied. notion_undo trashes the copy.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
toNoDestination page or database. Defaults to the original's parent.
pageYesPage to copy.
titleNoDefaults to "<original title> (copy)".
dry_runNo
max_rowsNoRows copied per data source (default and cap 500).
databasesNoDatabases on the page: copy schema and rows (up to 500 per data source), schema only, or skip them.rows
copy_row_contentNoCopy each row's own content (blocks, sub-pages, databases). Turn off for large databases where only values matter.
data_source_nameNo
include_subpagesNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.10.0

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations mark it as non-read-only and non-destructive, but the description adds rich behavioral detail: what gets skipped, status 'partial', re-uploading of files, relation handling, and the role of dry_run and notion_undo. This goes well beyond 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.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single dense paragraph that front-loads the core behavior. It is efficient but could be slightly more structured for readability; every sentence does contribute useful information.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the complexity (9 parameters, no output schema), the description covers most operational aspects: copy scope, database handling, file re-upload, and undo/dry-run. However, it doesn't address error conditions, rate limits, or the exact format of the 'partial' status result.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 67%, so the description must compensate. It explains the 'databases' parameter behavior, the effect of dry_run, and what max_rows controls. However, it doesn't clarify all parameters (e.g., data_source_name, include_subpages) fully, leaving some ambiguity.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description specifies exactly what is copied (icon, cover, content blocks, writable properties) and what is not (views, linked views, read-only blocks). It clearly distinguishes the tool from siblings like notion_create_page and notion_copy_blocks by focusing on full page duplication.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

While the description implies use cases (e.g., dry_run for preview, notion_undo for reversal), it doesn't explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives such as notion_copy_blocks or notion_create_page. The guidance is implied rather than spelled out.

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