Confluence MCP Server

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the tool retrieves content but doesn't mention any behavioral traits such as read-only nature (implied by 'get'), authentication requirements, rate limits, or what happens if the page ID is invalid. This leaves significant gaps in understanding how the tool behaves in practice.

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, efficient sentence that directly states the tool's purpose without any wasted words. It is appropriately sized and front-loaded, making it easy to parse quickly, which aligns well with the conciseness criteria.

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 lack of annotations and output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't address what the tool returns (e.g., full content, metadata, or error handling), nor does it provide context on usage versus siblings. For a tool with no structured behavioral data, the description should do more to compensate, but it remains minimal.

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 has 100% description coverage, with the 'pageId' parameter clearly documented. The description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema provides, as it only restates that the tool uses a page ID. According to the rules, with high schema coverage, the baseline is 3 even without param info in the description.

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 the content') and resource ('a Confluence page by ID'), making the purpose immediately understandable. However, it doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like 'list_confluence_pages' or 'search_confluence_pages' beyond the basic verb, missing an opportunity to specify this is for retrieving a single page's content rather than metadata or search results.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'list_confluence_pages' or 'search_confluence_pages'. The description implies usage when you have a specific page ID, but it doesn't explicitly state this as a prerequisite or contrast with other tools, leaving the agent to infer context from the tool name alone.

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