Get Confluence page

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds one genuinely useful behavioral fact — the default expansions returned — which is beyond what annotations say. It omits error behavior, auth requirements, and what happens when an expanded field is unavailable, so it is additive but thin.

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?

A single sentence with zero filler, front-loaded with the verb and resource, then the scope, then the return content. Every clause carries information.

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?

With no output schema, the description does useful work by enumerating the default returned sections. However, for a tool whose only real lever is the expand array, leaving that parameter entirely unexplained leaves a gap an agent will hit as soon as it wants anything beyond the defaults.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description carries the full burden and only partly delivers. "by ID" effectively explains contentId, but the phrase "by default" gestures at expand without ever naming it, listing accepted values, or explaining how it changes the response. Half the parameters remain undocumented in both schema and 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?

States a specific verb and resource ("Read a Confluence content item") scoped by "by ID", which separates it from search/list siblings. It also names the default returned sections (body, version, space, ancestors), so an agent knows what it gets. It does not name a sibling explicitly, but the by-ID framing is clear enough.

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?

Usage is only implied: the "by ID" phrasing signals this is the tool for retrieving a known page rather than searching. There is no explicit guidance on when to prefer confluence_search, when to use confluence_rest, or any prerequisite (IDs, permissions). An agent must infer the routing.

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