Create Page from Template

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

Annotations only provide destructiveHint=false, so the description carries the behavioral load. It adds genuinely useful context beyond that: Cloud-only availability, that the template body is fetched and inserted as storage-format content, and that the created page remains editable afterward. It does not cover permissions or failure scenarios, but it gives a solid behavioral picture for a create tool.

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 three short sentences with no filler. The first sentence gives the core operation, the second states the Cloud-only limitation, and the third points to the subsequent editing tool. Every sentence earns its place.

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 an existing output schema and only a destructiveHint annotation, the description covers the essential context: what the tool does, the Cloud-only restriction, and the follow-up editing path. A note about prerequisites or permissions would be a minor enhancement, but the definition is complete enough for an agent to invoke 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 the schema already documents title, parent_id, space_key, and template_id. The description's mention of the 'named template' does not add extra parameter-level meaning, so the 100%-coverage baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 that the operation creates a new Cloud page pre-populated with a template's body, and it notes the storage-format content. This distinguishes it from the generic confluence_create_page and related page-composition tools, though it does not explicitly name a sibling or draw a contrast with it.

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?

It communicates a hard environment constraint (Confluence Cloud only) and a follow-up edit path via confluence_update_page, which implies when the tool is relevant. It stops short of explicitly saying when to use this over confluence_create_page or how to source a valid template_id, so the usage guidance remains mainly implicit.

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