confluence_get_page_body_chunk

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

Annotations already provide read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive hints. The description adds no additional behavioral context (e.g., rate limits, auth), but since the operation is read-only and simple, the annotations suffice. No contradiction exists.

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 efficiently conveys the tool's function and typical use case without unnecessary detail.

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 read operation, the description is adequate. It does not specify output format or error behavior, but these are not critical given the tool's straightforward nature and lack of an output schema.

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 descriptions are minimal (e.g., 'The page ID', 'Start character offset'), but the tool description clarifies that offsets and lengths are in characters. It does not elaborate on defaults, maximums, or units beyond that, leaving some room for ambiguity.

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 reads a page body in chunks by character offset/length, and adds a use case ('useful for very large pages'). It distinguishes from siblings like confluence_get_page which likely returns the full page.

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 indicates when to use this tool ('useful for very large pages'), implying it is an alternative to reading the entire page at once. It does not explicitly contrast with other tools, but the use-case guidance is clear enough.

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