get-onenote-page

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, covering the safety profile. The description adds useful context about the metadata-only scope and directs the agent to the content tool, but it does not disclose what metadata fields are returned or whether any rate limits or auth requirements apply. This matches the baseline expected when annotations cover safety.

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 each earn their place: one states the tool's purpose, the other names the sibling for content retrieval. There is no repetition 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?

For a simple single-parameter metadata read tool, the description is mostly complete: it says what is returned at a high level, points to the content counterpart, and annotations cover safety. It would be stronger if it enumerated the metadata fields or noted the absence of an output schema, but an agent can likely infer the scope correctly from 'metadata.'

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?

There is only one parameter, pageId, and the schema description covers it 100% with 'Value for pageId.' The description adds no additional meaning about the parameter beyond the schema, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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?

Description uses a specific verb and resource: 'Get metadata of a OneNote page.' It also distinguishes itself from get-onenote-page-content by explicitly stating that the content tool is for the body. An agent can immediately tell this tool is for metadata only.

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 clearly indicates that this tool is appropriate for metadata and that get-onenote-page-content should be used for the actual body. It stops short of explicitly discussing when to prefer this over other OneNote listing or search tools, but it gives clear contextual guidance for the most likely alternative.

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