Replace Page Content

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

The description reinforces the destructiveHint annotation by warning 'action irréversible', but adds limited new behavioral context beyond what annotations already provide. It does not discuss auth needs, rate limits, or other side effects.

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—one sentence plus a warning—with no wasted words. It front-loads the action and the cautionary note, making it highly efficient.

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 the tool's simplicity and full schema coverage, the description adequately covers core functionality and irreversibility. It omits return value details but is sufficient for a straightforward destructive operation.

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%, with each parameter having a basic description. The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema's parameter descriptions, so it meets the baseline expectation.

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 tool replaces entire page content with markdown, specifying the verb 'remplace', the resource 'page content', and the format. It distinguishes from siblings like coda_update_page or coda_append_page_content by emphasizing full replacement.

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 warns that the action is irreversible, implying caution, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like coda_update_page or coda_append_page_content. No direct comparison or exclusion criteria are provided.

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