confluence_list_spaces

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavior. It explicitly indicates a read operation ('List') and suggests a practical use case, but it fails to mention pagination behavior, return format, or whether results are limited to keys only. This is moderate transparency, lacking depth.

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, compact sentence that front-loads the core action ('List Confluence spaces') and adds a useful parenthetical note. Every word earns its place; there is no filler 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?

For a simple list tool, the description is adequate but sparse. It doesn't describe the output schema or pagination details, which are not covered elsewhere. However, given the simplicity of the tool and the presence of limit/start parameters in the schema, a 3 is fair—it meets the minimum but leaves gaps.

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 schema provides no descriptions for the parameters, and the description does not mention 'limit' or 'start' at all. While the names are somewhat self-explanatory, the description adds zero semantic value beyond the schema, which is a significant gap given the 0% schema description coverage.

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 a specific action ('List') and resource ('Confluence spaces'), making the tool's purpose immediately obvious. The parenthetical 'useful to discover valid space keys' adds practical context and distinguishes this from sibling tools like page retrieval or search.

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 phrase 'useful to discover valid space keys' provides clear context for when to use this tool (e.g., before other operations requiring space keys). However, it does not explicitly contrast with alternatives or state exclusions, so it falls short of a 5.

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