Bulk Get Pages

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is known. The description adds useful behavioral details: it returns a 'results list with one entry per resolved page ID' and specifies the parameter limit 'up to 250'. This goes beyond the annotations, though it does not cover all edge cases (e.g., behavior for invalid IDs).

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 concise and well-structured, with a clear opening sentence followed by an 'Args' section. Every sentence adds value: it states the purpose, describes the return format, and defines the parameters without unnecessary fluff. It earns its place.

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 only 2 parameters, no output schema, and strong annotations, the description is nearly complete. It clarifies the return type ('results list') and the parameter limits, which are critical for usage. It does not explain error handling or result ordering, but for a simple read-only batch operation, the provided information is sufficient.

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?

The input schema has no parameter descriptions (0% coverage), so the description fully compensates. It explains each parameter: 'page_ids: List of page IDs to retrieve (up to 250)' and 'body_format: Body representation — 'storage', 'atlas_doc_format', or 'view''. This provides meaning and allowed values that the schema lacks, making it highly useful for correct invocation.

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 states exactly what the tool does: 'Fetch multiple pages by their IDs in a single request.' It uses a specific verb ('Fetch'), names the resource ('pages'), and clearly differentiates from sibling tools like 'get_page' by emphasizing the batch aspect. This makes the purpose 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 implies when to use the tool: when you need multiple pages at once, saving multiple requests. It mentions 'a single request' and a limit of 250, providing clear context. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use it, so it falls short of a 5.

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