Download All Content Attachments

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

Beyond the readOnlyHint annotation, the description discloses that attachments are returned as base64-encoded embedded resources (important for MCP usage), that files over 50 MB are skipped, and that errors are reported in a summary. This adds significant behavioral context not present in annotations.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the main action, and wastes no words. It efficiently communicates purpose, output format, and a key limitation.

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?

For a simple one-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers the essential aspects: what it does, how results are returned (base64), the 50 MB limit, and error handling. This is sufficient for an agent to select and invoke the tool correctly.

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 already provides full coverage for the single parameter (content_id) with a clear description. The tool description does not add further parameter semantics beyond what the schema states, so a baseline score 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 clearly states the tool's function: downloading all attachments for a Confluence content item and embedding them as base64 resources. It specifies the resource (content item) and scope (all attachments), distinguishing it from sibling tools that download single attachments or list metadata.

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 provides clear context: use when you need all attachments for a content item as embedded resources. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the use case is well-defined and implied by the 'all attachments' scope.

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