Get Pages

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

Annotations already indicate a safe read, but the description adds rich behavioral detail: all-pages mode returns no children, pageIds mode includes top-level children, batch size is capped, and partial failures are handled with a structured pageErrors row while other pages still return. This goes well beyond the annotation's coverage.

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?

Two tightly packed sentences that front-load the purpose, then explain conditional behavior and error handling. Every word earns its place, with no filler or repetition.

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 an output schema present, return value details are handled elsewhere. The description covers the two main usage modes, batch limitation, and failure semantics, making it fully complete for a listing tool with one optional parameter.

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 already describes pageIds with 100% coverage, so the baseline is 3. The description adds extra meaning by detailing the mode contrast (with vs without pageIds) and the batching constraint, giving deeper insight into how the parameter affects behavior.

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 a specific verb and resource ('List the document's pages'), clearly distinguishing it from sibling node operations. It also differentiates two invocation modes (all pages vs specific pages with children), leaving no ambiguity about what the tool does.

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 explains when to use each mode (no args for all pages, pageIds for specific pages) and includes the batch limit of 25 ids/call. It doesn't explicitly name alternatives like node_info for non-page nodes, but the intended usage context is clear.

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