search_confluence

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

No annotations are provided, and the description does not disclose behavioral traits such as read-only nature, required permissions, pagination details, or return format. The schema provides parameter descriptions, but behavioral context is missing.

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 concise sentence covering the main operations. It is efficient but could be better structured by front-loading the core action and separating methods. Still, it is not wasteful.

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?

With no output schema and limited detail, the description fails to explain what the search returns, pagination behavior, or how to use the cursor parameter. The input schema covers parameters, but overall context for a complex tool is insufficient.

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 coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds value by grouping operations (CQL, full-text, by_label, by_contributor, recent) and explaining the CQL acronym, which goes beyond the schema's individual parameter descriptions.

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 tool's purpose as searching Confluence using specific methods (CQL, full-text, labels, contributors). It distinguishes from sibling tools that focus on editing, managing, or navigating Confluence content.

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 lists available search operations but does not explicitly guide when to use this tool over siblings or provide context on when not to use it. The usage can be inferred but lacks direct guidance.

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