Get Page

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/openWorld/non-destructive, so safety is covered. The description adds genuine extra context: the outline format includes block ids for later surgical edits, and last_edited_time can be echoed back as expected_last_edited_time to avoid clobbering concurrent edits — a concurrency-control hint annotations cannot express.

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-loads the purpose in the first clause, then the format semantics, then the concurrency tip. Dense but every sentence carries information; slightly long for the payload but no 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?

No output schema exists, so the description rightly describes returns (properties, database, content, block ids, markdown flavors). It does not mention truncation/pagination behavior for max_blocks, which is the main remaining gap for an agent deciding how much will come back.

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 only 40%, and the description only elaborates on 'format' (its enum values and downstream consumers). max_depth, max_blocks, and include_content are left to their names and defaults, so the description does not fully compensate for the coverage gap.

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?

Opens with a specific verb+resource ('Read a page') and enumerates exactly what is returned: properties as simple values, parent database, and content. This distinguishes it from block-level siblings like notion_get_blocks and notion_find_blocks without needing to inspect schemas.

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?

Explains the two format modes and routes the agent to the right consumers: 'outline' for surgical edits via notion_patch_block/insert/delete/copy_blocks, 'markdown' for round-tripping into notion_insert_blocks/notion_create_page. It does not explicitly contrast against notion_get_blocks or notion_find_blocks, so it stops short of full when-not guidance.

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