update_page

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure, but it only states 'update an existing page'. It omits critical details like optimistic locking via version number, required permissions, or error conditions (e.g., wrong version, access denied).

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 states the core purpose. While it lacks additional context, it is front-loaded and wastes no words. A slight expansion for guidelines would improve it without losing conciseness.

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 4 required parameters and no output schema, the description should explain return values, conflict resolution, and how to determine success. It does not, and it offers no differentiation from sibling tools like add_comment or add_attachment.

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%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, which already has detailed parameter descriptions (e.g., content must be XHTML). No extra value from the description.

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 'Update an existing Confluence page' clearly states the verb (update) and resource (existing Confluence page). It distinguishes from sibling tools like create_page, which creates new pages.

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 create_page or get_page. There is no mention of prerequisites like the need for the correct version number or concurrency handling.

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