search_confluence

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

With no annotations, the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It only states the basic functionality and provides an example, but omits details on pagination, rate limits, error handling, or what the tool does beyond the search itself.

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 very short with one sentence and an example. It front-loads the core purpose. No redundant wording, but it could include slightly more essential information 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?

An output schema exists, so return value descriptions are unnecessary. However, the description lacks context on how max_results affects results, error handling for invalid CQL, or any timeouts. It is adequate for a minimal tool 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?

Schema coverage is 0%, placing the burden on the description. The description gives a CQL example but does not explain the 'cql' parameter syntax or constraints, nor does it describe 'max_results' behavior. The example partially compensates but lacks full semantics.

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 verb 'Search', the resource 'Confluence pages', and the method 'using CQL'. It also provides a concrete example, distinguishing it from sibling search tools like search_bitbucket_repos or search_tickets.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_space_pages or other search tools. The CQL example implies usage for specific queries, but no when-not-to-use or prerequisite information is provided.

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