Get Page Content

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint, so the description's burden is lower. It adds that output is in markdown format, which is useful. However, no additional behavioral details (e.g., rate limits, authentication needs) are provided, and the description does not contradict annotations.

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, concise sentence that front-loads the key information (action, resource, output format). Every word is necessary and there is no redundancy.

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?

The description explains the output format (markdown) but does not specify what 'full content' includes (e.g., whether images, tables, or metadata are preserved). Without an output schema, additional details like response structure or length limitations would enhance completeness.

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 coverage is 100% with both parameters documented. The description implicitly clarifies that 'doc_id' and 'page_id' refer to a Coda document and page, but this is already clear from the schema descriptions. No extra meaning is added beyond what the schema provides.

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 action (récupère), resource (contenu complet d'une page Coda), and output format (markdown). It effectively conveys the tool's purpose but does not explicitly differentiate it from sibling tools like 'coda_peek_page' which likely provides a summary, missing an opportunity for clarity.

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 guidelines are provided about when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention when not to use it or what prerequisites (e.g., page must exist) are required. The description only states the function, leaving the agent to infer context.

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