Check Content Permissions

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already signals a safe READ operation, and the description adds useful context by mentioning the wrapped POST endpoint (surprising for a read, but clarified by 'Check') and the specific return shape ('hasPermission' boolean). It also discloses the Cloud-only platform limitation, which is valuable behavioral context.

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 three short paragraphs that front-load the main action. Every sentence earns its place: the endpoint wrapper, the Cloud-only restriction, and the return value are each conveyed in a single, clear sentence 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?

This is a simple permission-check tool. The description covers the operation's purpose, the API endpoint, platform restrictions, and the return format. With a full output schema and rich input schema already present, the description is complete for the tool's complexity.

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 provides thorough descriptions for all four parameters, including examples, defaults, and allowed values (100% coverage). The description does not add extra parameter-level detail beyond what the schema already states, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 opens with a clear action verb ('Check') and a specific resource ('content permissions'), making the tool's purpose immediately obvious. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like confluence_set_page_restrictions by focusing on checking a permission rather than modifying restrictions.

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 notes the Cloud-only availability, which is an explicit exclusion for Server/Data Center users. It also clearly states that it returns a hasPermission boolean, implying when to use this tool, but it does not explicitly name alternative tools or exclusions beyond the platform note.

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