Get page

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

Discloses the epistemic block with detailed fields (freshness, provenance, corroboration) and their implications. Exceeds what annotations provide (readOnlyHint, no destructive/ openWorld). No contradictions with 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?

Concise, front-loaded with purpose, and each sentence adds value. No fluff.

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 output schema exists, description covers all necessary context: what is returned, parameter modes, and how to use the epistemic block. Adequately handles tool complexity.

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%, but description adds significant value by explaining each format option: 'full' returns markdown body, 'map' returns heading outline (cheap, targets for patch_page), 'values' returns computed spreadsheet for sheet pages. This clarifies usage beyond 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 clearly states 'Full markdown body + metadata for a numeric page id', specifying the resource and verb. It distinguishes from siblings by focusing on retrieval of content and trust signals, not modification or listing.

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?

Provides guidance on how to interpret the epistemic block ('prefer fresh, corroborated, human-reviewed pages'), which helps in acting on the output. Implicitly indicates when to use the tool (when full content and trust signals are needed) vs alternatives like format='map' for cheap outlines.

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