confluence_delete_page

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

With no annotations provided, the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It only states 'Delete a page' without any details on side effects (e.g., permanent deletion, cascading deletes), required permissions, or error conditions.

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 very concise at one short sentence, which is appropriate for a simple tool. It front-loads the action and resource, but lacks any structural details like sections or bullet points.

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 a single required parameter and no output schema, the description should still mention that deletion is irreversible or provide context about what happens after deletion. It is incomplete for safe usage.

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% with a clear parameter description for 'pageId'. The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, which is acceptable per the baseline for high 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 the action ('Delete') and the resource ('a page'), matching the tool name. It is specific enough to distinguish from general 'get' or 'update' tools, though it does not differentiate from sibling tools like 'delete_label' or 'delete_attachment'.

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 such as 'update_page' or 'archive_page'. There is no mention of prerequisites, implications of deletion (e.g., irreversibility), or when not to use it.

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