get-site-onenote-page-content

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the description does not need to repeat safety. It adds the useful behavioral detail that the response is full HTML content, but gives no further context on format, size, or output representation.

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 entire description is one short, front-loaded sentence with no filler. Every word adds signal: Get, FULL HTML content, SharePoint-hosted, OneNote page.

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 read-only, idempotent tool with two fully documented parameters and no output schema, the description covers the essential retrieval purpose and return type. It would be slightly stronger if it named the sibling for personal OneNote pages, but the SharePoint-hosted qualifier carries most of that burden.

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 schema already documents the two required parameters. The description adds only the SharePoint-hosted context, which the siteId schema description already conveys; no additional parameter semantics are needed.

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 states a specific action ('Get'), exact resource ('OneNote page'), and scope ('SharePoint-hosted', 'FULL HTML content'). The qualifiers distinguish it from the sibling get-onenote-page-content without requiring the agent to infer from the name.

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 implies the tool is for SharePoint-hosted pages rather than personal OneDrive pages, but it never states when to choose it over get-onenote-page-content or other site-onenote siblings. No exclusions or alternative-selection guidance are provided.

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