confluence_search_pages

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full behavioral disclosure burden. It does state the output shape (page IDs and URLs) and 'Search' implies a read-only operation, but it does not describe pagination behavior, result ordering, access scope, or error/empty-result handling. This is adequate but leaves clear gaps.

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. Every word contributes to identifying the action, resource, method, and output, making it an efficient and well-structured definition.

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 basics are covered: required cql, optional limit/start, and output of IDs/URLs are all present. However, with no output schema and no annotations, the description would benefit from more detail about response shape, pagination, and when to prefer sibling search tools. It is usable but not fully complete.

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?

Only the cql parameter has a schema description ('CQL query'), and the tool description adds no parameter-level detail beyond repeating 'with CQL.' With schema description coverage at 33%, the description should compensate for limit and start semantics but does not, leaving the agent to infer from names and numeric constraints.

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 ('Search'), a clear resource ('Confluence pages'), and a distinctive query method ('with CQL'), then states the output ('page IDs and URLs'). This distinguishes it from Jira sibling tools and from Confluence tools like get_page or list_spaces. The CQL qualifier also helps separate it from confluence_find_pages_for_issue.

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?

There is no explicit guidance about when to use this tool versus alternatives such as confluence_find_pages_for_issue or confluence_get_page. The description implies CQL-based searching but does not state when not to use it or which sibling tool to prefer for different needs.

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