create_page

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

Without annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden, and it does disclose non-obvious behavior: unsupported markdown fails before Notion is touched, and properties are only accepted for database parents. It still omits return-shape and permission/rate-limit context, but the key side-effect and failure semantics are not hidden.

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 compact and front-loaded, with each clause adding a distinct fact needed for correct invocation. There is no filler or repetition of schema boilerplate.

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 write tool with no annotations and no output schema, it covers all four parameters, the markdown failure mode, and the get_database_schema prerequisite. Missing return/response detail and permissions are minor gaps, but an agent can invoke it correctly from this text alone.

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, this is the description's strongest contribution. It enumerates accepted parent_ref formats (alias, notion.so URL, id, or exact title), explains the title-with-database-parent rule, lists supported markdown constructs, and scopes properties to database parents with a prerequisite call. This fully compensates for the bare schema.

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 a specific verb and resource—'Create a page'—and defines the two contexts: as a row in a database or as a subpage of another page. This makes it clearly distinct from sibling tools like append_to_page and update_row.

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?

It gives concrete when-to-use guidance by telling the agent to call get_database_schema first for a database parent and restricting properties to that case. It also instructs the agent to set the title directly rather than through properties. It doesn't explicitly name exclusions against append_to_page, but the creation-vs-modification context is clear.

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