Copy Page

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

Annotations already declare readOnly=false, destructive=true and openWorld=true, yet the description adds genuinely new behavior: the implementation differs by deployment, and on Server/DC the body is re-fetched and attachments are not copied. That fidelity caveat is material and not visible in the schema or annotations. It does not explain the destructiveHint=true flag or required permissions, so not a 5.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the core action followed by the platform caveat. No filler or repetition of the title.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need no explanation, and the key behavioral wrinkle (Server/DC drops attachments) is covered. Minor gaps remain around title collisions, permissions, and whether the copy inherits labels/restrictions, but the agent has enough to call it 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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so each parameter is already documented, including the Cloud-only restriction on copy_attachments. The description merely echoes that limitation and adds no format, precedence, or edge-case detail beyond the schema, so baseline 3 applies.

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?

Clear verb+resource (copy a Confluence page) with the target scope (to a new location). It does not explicitly contrast with nearby siblings like confluence_create_page or confluence_move_page, but the operation is unambiguous.

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?

Usage is only implied by the verb 'copy'; there is no statement of when to prefer this over confluence_create_page or confluence_move_page, and no prerequisite or permission guidance. The deployment-dependent explanation gives context but not selection guidance.

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