Get Page Direct Children

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

With annotations declaring readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=true, the description's 'Get' aligns with the read-only safety profile. The description does not add significant behavioral detail beyond the one-level-deep scope, such as pagination behavior or error handling, but annotations cover the core safety traits effectively.

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 succinct: a single purpose sentence followed by a well-organized Args block. No redundant information; every line adds value.

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 simple read-only paginated list tool with good annotation coverage and a clear purpose, the description covers purpose, parameters, and scope. The lack of an output schema is acceptable as the description need not explain return values. It is complete for the tool's simplicity.

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 schema provides no descriptions (0% coverage), but the description includes an Args block defining page_id as 'Parent page ID', cursor as 'Pagination cursor', and limit as 'Max results'. This adds essential meaning to each parameter, going beyond the schema's bare names and types.

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 'Get the immediate (one-level-deep) children of a page,' which clearly identifies the action (get), the resource (children of a page), and the scope (immediate/one-level-deep). This effectively distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_page_descendants and get_page_ancestors.

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 provides clear context by specifying 'one-level-deep' children, implying this tool is for direct children only, while deeper hierarchies would need a different tool. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when-not-to-use, so it stops short of full guidance.

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