bookstack_pages_list

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It mentions visibility ('visible to the authenticated user'), which is useful for permissions context, but lacks other behavioral details: no rate limits, no pagination behavior beyond parameters, no error handling, no output format hints. It's minimal for a list tool with filtering.

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 a single, efficient sentence that front-loads the core purpose. It avoids redundancy and wastes no words. However, it could be slightly more structured by separating key features (e.g., 'List pages with pagination, filtering, and visibility constraints').

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?

Given 4 parameters with 100% schema coverage but no annotations and no output schema, the description is adequate but incomplete. It covers the basic purpose and hints at visibility constraints, but lacks guidance on usage, behavioral details, and output expectations. For a list tool with filtering, more context would be helpful.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so parameters are well-documented in the schema. The description adds marginal value by mentioning 'pagination and filtering options', which aligns with count/offset and filter parameters, but doesn't provide additional semantics beyond what the schema already explains. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 verb ('List') and resource ('pages visible to the authenticated user'), and mentions key features ('pagination and filtering options'). It distinguishes from other page tools (create, delete, export, read, update) by focusing on listing. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from other list tools like bookstack_books_list or bookstack_chapters_list.

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 minimal guidance—it implies usage when listing pages with pagination/filtering, but offers no explicit when-to-use rules, prerequisites, or alternatives. It doesn't help an agent decide between this and other list tools (e.g., bookstack_search for broader searches).

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