get_page

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

The description discloses the output format (clean plain text and metadata) and notes caching behavior, which are useful behavioral details. However, it does not mention potential errors or limitations, but for a simple read operation this is acceptable.

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 that conveys the core functionality without unnecessary words. It is well-structured and easy to parse.

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 simplicity of the tool (one parameter, no output schema, no annotations), the description covers the essential aspects: what it does, the output format, and caching. It could elaborate on edge cases, but it is sufficiently complete for typical use.

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 has one parameter (page_id) which is self-explanatory and required. The description adds no extra context about the parameter, but its meaning is clear from the name and type. Since schema coverage is high, a score of 3 is appropriate.

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 fetches a Confluence page and returns clean plain text plus metadata, which is specific and distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_ticket or search_confluence. The verb 'fetch' and resource 'Confluence page' are explicit.

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 does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as search_confluence or get_child_pages. It mentions caching but lacks guidance on selection criteria or scenarios where this tool is preferred.

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