Update Page

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

Beyond annotations, the description adds valuable behavioral details: version_number must be current+1, version_message is stored in history, and cross-space moves are not allowed. These go beyond the schema and annotations, though it does not mention potential error responses or the operation's return value.

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 opens with a concise summary, followed by two focused usage notes and a well-organized Args list. Every sentence provides necessary information without redundancy, making it appropriately sized and easy to scan.

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?

Although the description thoroughly documents inputs, it lacks details about the output (the updated page object) and does not discuss error conditions beyond the version_number constraint. Given the tool's complexity and absence of an output schema, this leaves some gaps.

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 itself has no descriptions (0% coverage), but the description's Args section explains all 9 parameters, including defaults, constraints (e.g., version_number must be current+1), and allowed formats (body_representation). This fully compensates for the schema's lack of documentation.

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 tool updates an existing page and enumerates the modifiable attributes (content, title, parent, owner). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like create_page, delete_page, and update_page_title, making its 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?

Provides clear usage context for reparenting (parent_id, same-space only) and ownership transfer (owner_id), including the limitation that cross-space moves are unsupported. However, it does not explicitly mention when to prefer this tool over alternatives like update_page_title.

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