atlassian-browser-mcp

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

Annotations provide readOnlyHint=true, indicating a safe read operation. The description adds valuable context by specifying it returns a 'unified diff' and 'JSON string with page info and unified diff,' which clarifies the output format and behavior beyond the annotations. It does not contradict 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?

The description is front-loaded with the core purpose in the first sentence, followed by structured sections for args and returns. It is efficient with minimal waste, though the parameter listing in the description slightly duplicates schema info.

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 the tool's moderate complexity, 100% schema coverage, annotations covering safety, and an output schema (implied by 'Returns' section), the description is complete. It adequately explains the tool's function, parameters, and output without needing to detail return values or behavioral traits extensively.

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%, with detailed parameter descriptions in the input schema (e.g., page_id includes an example). The description lists parameters but does not add significant meaning beyond the schema, such as explaining relationships between from_version and to_version. Baseline 3 is appropriate given high schema coverage.

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 specific action ('Get a unified diff') and resource ('between two versions of a Confluence page'), distinguishing it from siblings like 'confluence_get_page' or 'confluence_get_page_history' that retrieve page content or version lists rather than differences between versions.

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 usage by specifying the tool's function, but it does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives like 'confluence_get_page_history' for version lists or 'confluence_get_page' for current content. No exclusions or prerequisites are mentioned.

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