Get Page Restrictions

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, and the description adds meaningful behavioral detail: it returns separate restriction lists for read and update operations, and an empty list means unrestricted for that operation. This clarifies the interpretation of results beyond the annotation.

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 short and front-loaded with the core purpose, then expands on what is returned and how to interpret empty lists. Every sentence adds useful, non-redundant information.

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?

For a read-only single-parameter tool with a full output schema, the description is complete. It explains the key behavioral nuance (empty list = unrestricted) and needs no further context 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% for the single parameter page_id, so the schema already documents it fully. The description does not add additional parameter-level detail, but none is needed for this simple, well-covered parameter.

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') with a clear resource ('view and edit restrictions for a Confluence page') and specifies the two operations covered (read/view and update/edit). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like confluence_set_page_restrictions and confluence_get_space_permissions.

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 clearly indicates this tool is for reading restriction lists, which gives clear context for when to use it. It does not explicitly state when not to use it or name alternatives, but the read-only framing and operation-specific detail make the intended use obvious.

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