clickup_doc_add_page

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It effectively describes the creation behavior, mentions optional nesting via 'parent_page_id', and specifies the return value ('Returns the created page object including its new id'). However, it doesn't address potential error conditions, rate limits, or authentication requirements, which would be helpful for a mutation tool.

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 perfectly front-loaded with the core purpose in the first sentence, followed by supporting details about nesting and return values. Every sentence adds essential information with zero waste, making it highly efficient and easy to parse.

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 mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description does well by explaining the creation behavior, nesting capability, and return value. However, it could be more complete by mentioning error handling, permissions needed, or whether the operation is idempotent, which would help an agent use it safely in various scenarios.

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 the schema already documents all parameters thoroughly. The description adds value by explaining the purpose of 'parent_page_id' ('Supply parent_page_id to nest the page under another page (creates a page tree)') and linking parameters to sibling tools ('which you can pass to clickup_doc_edit_page or clickup_doc_get_page'), providing context beyond the schema's technical descriptions.

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 specific action ('Create a new page inside an existing ClickUp doc'), identifies the resource ('page'), and distinguishes it from siblings like 'clickup_doc_create' (which creates docs, not pages) and 'clickup_doc_edit_page' (which edits existing pages). The verb 'create' is precise and unambiguous.

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 this tool ('Create a new page inside an existing ClickUp doc') and provides clear alternatives for related actions: 'clickup_doc_edit_page' for editing after creation and 'clickup_doc_get_page' for retrieving page details. It also mentions the prerequisite of having a parent doc via 'doc_id'.

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