Get a page

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the behavioral burden. It discloses 'Read-only' and 'doesn't consume credits', which are meaningful safety and cost traits. It does not mention error handling or authentication, but for a simple read operation, this is adequate.

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 only two sentences, front-loaded with the action and object. It contains no redundant or filler wording, and every word contributes meaning.

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 one-parameter, read-only fetch tool with no output schema or annotations, the description provides sufficient context: what it fetches, how to identify the page, and behavioral notes (read-only, no credits). A more complete description might mention not-found behavior, but this is not essential for selecting and invoking the tool correctly.

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?

The schema already provides 100% coverage with a clear description of the id_or_slug parameter. The description's 'by id or slug' reiterates the schema rather than adding new semantic detail, so it adds no extra value beyond the schema.

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 uses a specific verb ('Fetch') and a clear resource ('a single page'), and specifies the selection method ('by id or slug'). It also lists the returned fields ('slug, title, type, SEO meta'), making it easy to distinguish from sibling tools like get_gallery or get_blog_post.

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 implies use when retrieving a single page by identifier, but it does not explicitly state when not to use it or name alternative tools such as list_pages for listing or update_page for modifications. Usage context is present but no exclusions or alternatives are given.

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