get_page_by_id

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It states the core operation ('Get a specific page') and adds the nuance of retrieving from a change request, implying a read-only action. However, it does not detail return format, error behavior, permissions, or side effects, leaving significant gaps.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence that conveys the essential information economically. Every word contributes to the purpose, with no redundancy 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 straightforward read operation with no output schema and no annotations, the description is adequately complete. It clarifies the lookup method (by ID) and the optional change request scope. It could mention that it returns a page object, but the verb 'Get' implicitly conveys this. Overall, sufficient given the tool's simplicity.

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 all parameters are already documented. The description reinforces the optional 'changeRequestId' by mentioning 'or change request' but does not add extra semantic value beyond what the schema provides. Baseline 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?

The description clearly states a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('specific page by its ID from a GitBook space (or change request)'). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like get_page_by_path (which uses a path) and list_pages (which lists multiple pages) by emphasizing retrieval by ID.

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 when to use this tool: when you have a page ID rather than a path, and optionally within a change request context. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the 'by its ID' phrasing clearly differentiates from path-based retrieval, providing adequate context.

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