get_kb_page_comments

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It only states the basic action, without mentioning that the tool is read-only, how pagination works (e.g., maxResults), what happens if pageId is invalid, or any important side effects. The description is insufficient for an agent to understand the tool's behavior.

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 a single, clear sentence with no redundant words. It is appropriately front-loaded and concise. Every word serves a purpose, earning a top score for conciseness.

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 has two parameters, no output schema, and several sibling tools, the description lacks completeness. It does not describe the output format (e.g., list of comment objects), pagination behavior, or how this tool differs from 'get_comments'. The agent may struggle to use it effectively without additional context.

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 covers both parameters with descriptions, achieving 100% coverage. Per guidelines, baseline is 3. The description adds no additional information beyond what the schema already provides, such as clarifying maxResults' default or the pageId format. It meets the minimum but does not enhance understanding.

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 action ('Get comments') and the resource ('Confluence/KB page'), using a specific verb+resource pattern. However, it does not distinguish itself from the sibling tool 'get_comments', which likely retrieves comments for a broader context (e.g., issues). A score of 4 reflects clarity but missing sibling differentiation.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as 'get_comments' or 'add_comment'. There is no mention of prerequisites, context, or exclusions. This lack of usage hints makes it harder for an AI agent to choose correctly.

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