Switch Page

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

The annotations already declare idempotentHint=true and destructiveHint=false, but the description adds no further behavioral details. It fails to mention the effect on the current design state or undo history, which could be important for a mutating operation.

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 description is concise with a simple statement and an example, but the 'Args' list and the parameter explanation duplicate the schema. It earns a 4 for efficiency despite some redundancy.

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 tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description covers the basic operation but omits any context about side effects or error handling. The annotations fill some gaps, but the description itself lacks sufficient contextual completeness.

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 schema already documents page_id with 100% coverage, and the description's 'Args' section merely restates that definition. No additional semantics, formatting details, or edge cases are provided, so the description adds no value beyond the schema.

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 uses the specific verb 'switch' with a clear resource: 'a different page in the design project.' This effectively differentiates it from sibling tools like design_add_page and design_remove_page, which handle page creation and deletion.

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 provides no context on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention prerequisites or exclusions. It only states the action and parameter, leaving the agent without guidance on usage.

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