Get Page

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true, which already tells the agent this is a safe read operation. The description adds modest behavioral context by mentioning the convert_to_markdown option and its token usage impact, but the core description itself doesn't disclose much beyond what the schema already says. The schema describes the 'raw Confluence storage XHTML' behavior and its token implications, so the description plus schema together provide adequate transparency. Since annotations already cover the safety profile, a 3 is appropriate – the description adds some value but not rich behavioral context beyond what schema/annotations already provide.

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 one efficient sentence that conveys the core purpose and the two lookup mechanisms. The schema descriptions are detailed and well-formatted, with examples and clear warnings (e.g., token usage caution for storage format). Every sentence in the schema earns its place – there is no fluff or redundancy.

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?

The description plus 100% schema coverage plus readOnlyHint annotation fully equips an agent to select and invoke this tool correctly. It explains identification methods, precedence, optional behaviors, output format choice, and token usage implications. The output schema exists, so return values need not be described. Nothing an agent needs to call this correctly is missing.

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?

The input schema has 100% description coverage with detailed explanations for every parameter, including examples for page_id, conditions for space_key, and boolean meanings for include_metadata and convert_to_markdown. The description itself adds the identity-OR-relationship between parameters beyond the individual property descriptions, and clarifies the precedence rule (page_id overrides title/space_key). With full schema coverage, the baseline is 3, but the description's clarification of the mutual exclusivity and precedence adds genuine value, warranting a 4.

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 states a specific verb ('Get content') and resource ('a specific Confluence page'), and explicitly names the two lookup paths (by ID, or by title and space key). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like confluence_get_page_children, confluence_get_comments, or confluence_search, which have different focuses.

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 schema descriptions clearly state when to use title+space_key vs page_id, note that page_id takes precedence and title/space_key are ignored if page_id is provided, and explain the required relationship. The parameter descriptions effectively serve as usage guidance, telling the agent exactly how to select between alternatives. Additionally, the description's explicit mention of the two identification modes gives clear context for when to invoke this tool versus others like confluence_search or confluence_get_page_children.

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