confluence_get_pageRetrieve a Confluence page by ID or by space key and exact title. Returns the page body as markdown, with optional comments included.
Get a Confluence page by id, or by space key + exact title. Body is returned as markdown.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| title | No | ||
| page_id | No | ||
| space_key | No | ||
| include_comments | No |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| result | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the behavioral burden. It adds the useful detail that the body is returned as markdown, but it does not disclose behavior around missing lookup parameters, duplicate titles, or how include_comments affects the result.
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?
Two short sentences with no filler. The primary retrieval modes are front-loaded, and the markdown output fact adds value without redundancy.
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?
An output schema exists, so return shape does not need explanation, but the input contract is under-specified: all four parameters are optional in the schema while the tool likely requires at least one lookup key, and include_comments is left unexplained. This creates a meaningful gap for correct invocation.
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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must supply parameter meaning. It explains the relationship among page_id, space_key, and title, but says nothing about include_comments and leaves the exact combination rules for lookup keys implicit.
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 names a specific verb ('Get'), resource ('Confluence page'), and both available lookup modes ('by id, or by space key + exact title'). 'Body is returned as markdown' further clarifies what the tool produces and helps distinguish it from search-oriented siblings.
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?
It clearly states when to use the tool: when the agent has a page_id or a space_key plus exact title. It stops short of explicitly naming alternatives or exclusions, but the exact-match wording makes the intended use unambiguous.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.