Get Page History

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

The annotation 'readOnlyHint: true' already indicates read-only behavior. The description adds minimal additional behavioral context, such as the return format (JSON string). No side effects, auth needs, or rate limits are mentioned, but the read-only nature is sufficiently implied.

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 concise and well-structured, with a clear first-line summary followed by an Args section. No superfluous information; every sentence serves a purpose. It is front-loaded and easy to scan.

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 presence of an output schema (as per context signals), the description does not need to detail return values. It covers the tool's purpose, parameters, and return type sufficiently. The tool is simple and well-specified.

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 parameters. The description repeats the parameter names and purposes (page_id, version, convert_to_markdown) but adds no significant new semantic meaning beyond what is in the 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 'Get a historical version of a specific Confluence page' with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like 'confluence_get_page' (current version) and 'confluence_get_page_diff' (diff), as the purpose implies historical retrieval.

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 does not explicitly state when to use this tool or when not to. It lacks guidance on alternatives or prerequisites. The purpose is clear, but no direct usage instructions are provided.

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