Get Page

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

The description explains the effect of key parameters: get_draft returns the draft rather than the published version, and version returns a historical version. It also enumerates body_format options. These behavioral details go beyond the readOnly and openWorld hints provided by annotations, adding useful nuance about what the function returns.

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: a one-sentence purpose followed by a compact Args list where each parameter gets a single, meaningful line. No unnecessary text 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?

The tool is a straightforward read operation with optional parameters that influence output. The description covers all parameter behaviors, which is sufficient for invoking the tool correctly. It doesn't describe the full return structure or error cases, but the absence of an output schema is mitigated by the clear parameter explanations.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description fully compensates by explaining each parameter individually. body_format lists the three representation types, get_draft clarifies draft vs published logic, and version indicates historical retrieval. Even page_id is minimally identified as 'Page ID', matching its schema title.

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 'Get a page by ID', which clearly states the action (get), the resource (page), and the scoping key (ID). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_page_children or get_page_versions by focusing on the page entity itself.

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 this tool is used when you have a page ID and want the page's content or metadata. It does not explicitly mention when not to use it or name alternatives, but the context is clear enough for a basic retrieval tool.

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