Notion MCP Server

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden but only states 'Update a block' without disclosing behavioral traits. It doesn't mention that it can archive/unarchive blocks (per the schema), potential side effects, authentication needs, rate limits, or response format. This leaves critical gaps for a mutation tool.

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 extremely concise with just 'Notion | Update a block', which is front-loaded and wastes no words. Every part ('Notion', 'Update', 'a block') earns its place by specifying the service, action, and target.

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 complexity (mutation tool with 3 parameters, no annotations, no output schema), the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain what 'update' means operationally, return values, or error handling. For a tool that modifies data, this lack of context is a significant shortfall.

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 the schema fully documents parameters like 'archived' and 'type'. The description adds no meaning beyond this, not even hinting at parameter roles. Baseline 3 is appropriate as the schema does the heavy lifting, but the description doesn't compensate or enhance understanding.

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 'Notion | Update a block' states the verb ('Update') and resource ('a block'), but it's vague about what 'update' entails—it could mean modifying content, metadata, or status. It doesn't differentiate from siblings like 'API-patch-block-children' or 'API-retrieve-a-block', leaving ambiguity in scope.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. For example, it doesn't clarify if this is for minor edits versus major restructures, or when to choose 'API-delete-a-block' for removal instead. The description lacks context or exclusions.

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