swebsy_create_page

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses creation, default selection, the 'nearly empty' initial state, and that the response includes the new page's id and fileName. It does not mention prerequisites or side effects on the current selection, but core behavior is clearly conveyed.

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: primary action and return values first, followed by practical workflow guidance and an explicit when-not-to-use note. Every sentence adds distinct value with no filler.

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 straightforward creation tool, the description is nearly complete: it explains the blank state, return values, and how to continue the workflow. Minor gaps remain around whether a project must already be open and the effect of selecting the page, but these are not critical for correct invocation.

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%, and each parameter is already well documented. The description adds only minor context around `select` (default true) and the returned `fileName`, so the baseline of 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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Create a NEW blank page in the project.' It also explicitly distinguishes this tool from `replace_page_content` and describes its default select behavior and return values, making the 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?

Usage guidance is explicit: 'Use THIS to add an additional page; use `replace_page_content` (NOT this) to overwrite the current page's content.' It also tells the agent the intended follow-up workflow with `replace_page_content`, `add_section`, and `link_page`.

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