confluence_get_page_permissions

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

Annotations already declare this as read-only, idempotent, open-world, and non-destructive, so the description need not restate those traits. However, it adds no behavioral context beyond the tool's basic purpose—such as what specifically gets returned, how restrictions are represented, or any auth considerations.

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, front-loaded sentence with no filler or redundant information. Every word contributes to conveying the operation and target resource.

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?

The tool is simple (one parameter) and benefits from strong annotations and full schema coverage. However, with no output schema, the vague phrase 'restrictions/permissions' leaves uncertainty about what the response contains and whether both concepts are returned together.

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 fully documents the single `pageId` parameter, so the description does not need to repeat it. With 100% schema description coverage, the baseline of 3 is appropriate; the description adds no extra meaning about parameter formatting or expected values.

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 uses a specific verb ('Get') with a clear resource ('page restrictions/permissions'), immediately distinguishing it from sibling tools that retrieve page content, labels, comments, or metadata. It is unambiguous even without listing alternatives.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus other page-related getters such as confluence_get_page, confluence_get_page_properties, or confluence_get_page_labels. The intended use case is implied only by the tool name, not explicitly stated.

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