Copy an existing Notion page and its content blocks to create a duplicate, optionally with a new title or parent.
Duplicate an existing page with its content blocks
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| title | No | Title for the duplicate (defaults to "Copy of {original}") | |
| parent | No | Parent object for the duplicate (defaults to same parent) | |
| page_id | Yes | ID of the page to duplicate |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.6.1Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It mentions that content blocks are duplicated, which is useful, but omits critical behavioral details: what happens to permissions, comments, child pages, or workspace placement; whether the operation is reversible; or any auth/rate-limit constraints. For a mutation tool with zero annotation coverage, this is a significant gap.
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?
A single, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. The core action and scope are stated immediately.
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 is a mutating duplicate operation with a nested parent object, no annotations, and no output schema. The description does not address what gets copied beyond content blocks, nor does it mention permissions, failures, or side effects. Given the complexity and lack of structured behavioral disclosures, it is incomplete.
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%, so the schema already documents all three parameters (including defaults for title and parent). The description adds no parameter-level detail beyond what the schema provides. Baseline 3 applies when the schema does the heavy lifting.
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 ('Duplicate') and resource ('existing page'), and adds scope ('with its content blocks'), which distinguishes it from notion_create_page and notion_create_page_from_template. However, it does not explicitly name or contrast with those sibling tools, so it falls just short of a 5.
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?
There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus creating a new page, duplicating a database, or creating from a template. No prerequisites, exclusions, or alternative conditions are mentioned.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.