Get Pages

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true. The description adds behavioral context beyond annotations by explaining the effect of omitting vs including pageIds, and the batch limit. This is sufficient for a read-only 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 two sentences long, front-loaded with the main purpose, and every word serves a purpose. No redundancy or unnecessary details.

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?

Given that an output schema exists (so return values are handled), the description covers all necessary behavioral aspects: both invocation modes, batch limit, and result scope. For a simple listing tool with one optional parameter, this is 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 100% and the parameter description is already present in the schema. The description adds value by explaining the behavior difference when the parameter is omitted vs provided, but does not add new semantic details beyond the schema for the parameter itself. 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 specifies the verb 'list' and resource 'document's pages', and distinguishes between two modes: no args (all pages without children) and with pageIds (specific pages with top-level children). This clearly indicates the tool's purpose and differentiates it from sibling tools like node_info or node_select.

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 explicitly states when to use the tool without arguments (get all pages without children) and with the pageIds parameter (get specific pages with their top-level children). It also mentions a batch limit of ≤25 ids per call. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or provide alternatives, but the context from sibling tools makes this clear.

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