Get a saved page

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

readOnlyHint already establishes this is a safe read, and the description goes further by disclosing the payload's invariants, notably that bookmark, readAt and skimmedAt are mutually exclusive ('at most one'). It also flags that absolute filesystem paths for the Markdown file and clip images are returned, which is non-obvious behavioral context. It stops short of describing error or empty-result behavior.

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?

One sentence, front-loaded with the core action followed by a well-ordered enumeration of returned fields. The single sentence is long and slightly run-on, but every clause conveys distinct payload information rather than 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?

With no output schema, the description carries the full burden of describing return values and does so thoroughly across metadata, tags, reading state, clips and file paths. The main omission is failure/no-result behavior for an unresolvable id or URL, which for a single-item fetch tool is a meaningful gap.

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 100% and there is a single parameter, so the schema already documents idOrUrl fully. The description's 'Accepts a page id or its URL' merely restates the schema description without adding format, validation, or lookup-precedence detail, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource, 'Returns one page in full', and enumerates exactly what a page contains. It implicitly distinguishes itself from list_recent, search and list_tags by retrieving a single page rather than a collection, though it never names those siblings explicitly.

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?

Usage is only implied: the agent can infer this is the tool for fetching full details of one known page, since it accepts 'a page id or its URL'. There is no explicit statement of when to prefer this over search or list_recent, and no mention of what happens when the id/URL does not resolve.

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