create_page

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false, covering the mutating and non-destructive nature. The description adds the key side effect of auto-promoting a leaf page to a folder, which is not evident from the annotations. It does not disclose permission requirements or error behavior, but the addition of the promotion effect provides meaningful context beyond the structured fields.

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 two concise sentences with no filler. The core action is front-loaded ('Create a new page under a parent'), followed immediately by the key behavioral note and the optional template feature. Every sentence contributes meaning.

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?

The description covers the essential purpose, the promotion side effect, and the optional template, which together with the schema (that explains the landing page for root and marks required fields) provide sufficient context for an agent to invoke the tool correctly. It does not mention permissions or failure modes, but for a create tool with this schema coverage, it is reasonably complete.

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 coverage is 83%, so the schema already documents most parameters. The description only restates the roles of parent (parentPageId) and template (templateId) without adding new semantic details. For example, it does not clarify the meaning of collectiveId or any constraints beyond what the schema provides. This aligns with the baseline 3 for high schema coverage.

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 the tool's function with a specific verb ('Create') and resource ('page'), and specifies the context ('under a parent'). It also adds two distinctive behaviors—promoting a leaf page to a folder and optional template initialization—which distinguishes it from sibling tools like update_page, delete_page, and copy_page.

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 the tool (to create a page under a parent, optionally from a template) but does not explicitly mention alternatives or conditions for when not to use it. It lacks direct routing to sibling tools like copy_page or list_templates, leaving some inference to the agent.

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