Get Page Images

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

Annotations only provide readOnlyHint=true, so the description adds substantial behavioral detail: it lists supported image formats, base64 encoding, fallback detection for ambiguous MIME types, and a 50 MB size limit with error handling. This goes beyond the annotation and fully discloses edge-case behavior.

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 well-structured with a clear first sentence stating the purpose, followed by two short paragraphs covering filtering and edge-case behavior. Every sentence adds value without redundancy or fluff.

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 the tool's simple interface (one required parameter), the description comprehensively covers what is returned (base64 ImageContent), what is excluded, and important edge cases like size limits and MIME detection. No output schema exists, so the description carries the full burden and does so effectively.

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 schema description covers the single parameter (content_id) 100%, including what it represents. The tool description does not add additional parameter semantics beyond the schema, so the 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 gets all images attached to a Confluence page as inline image content. It uses a specific verb+resource and explicitly distinguishes from sibling tools like confluence_get_attachments by filtering to images only and excluding non-image attachments.

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: it is for images only, with non-image attachments excluded. It implies use when you need inline image content, but does not explicitly name alternative tools like confluence_get_attachments; however, the exclusion statement provides sufficient guidance.

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