get_page_content

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

The description states it retrieves the 'full content body', adding context beyond the readOnlyHint annotation. However, it does not disclose potential behaviors like large response size, required permissions, or error states. The annotation already covers the read-only nature, so a baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 followed by a parameter list. Every word earns its place, and the structure is front-loaded with the purpose. No wasted content.

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 tool has an output schema, so return value details are not needed. Given the two parameters and the description's coverage, it is sufficiently complete for a simple retrieval tool. Missing context about potential alternatives or usage scenarios, but not critical.

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?

With 0% schema coverage, the description compensates by explaining each parameter's meaning: 'Course code or Canvas ID' for course_identifier and 'Page URL slug or page ID' for page_url_or_id. This adds significant value over the schema's bare titles. However, it could be slightly more explicit about acceptable formats.

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 ('Get') and the resource ('full content body of a specific page'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like 'get_page_details' (metadata) and 'list_pages' (listing). However, it does not specify the format of the content body (e.g., HTML, plain text), which slightly reduces 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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as 'get_page_details' or 'get_front_page'. It lacks any context about prerequisites, limitations, or exclusions.

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