confluence_create_page

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

No annotations are provided, so the description alone must disclose behavior. It reveals the HTTP method and accepted body formats, but it does not mention permissions, side effects, response behavior, idempotency, or handling of existing pages. This is insufficient for a mutating operation.

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 short sentences that directly state the core action, endpoint, and body format requirement. It is efficient and front-loaded, though it sacrifices completeness for brevity.

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 creation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description omits critical context: how to obtain spaceId, semantics of status and parentId, relationship between bodyValue and bodyRepresentation, error behavior, and response contents. This is incomplete for a 6-parameter operation.

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 only 17%, with spaceId being the only parameter described. The description adds a note about 'storage HTML or atlas_doc_format', which clarifies the bodyRepresentation/bodyValue pairing, but it leaves title, status, parentId, and bodyValue semantics largely unexplained.

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 states a specific action ('Creates a page') and identifies the resource plus the HTTP endpoint. The verb 'creates' differentiates it from sibling tools like confluence_update_page and confluence_get_page, though it does not explicitly name those alternatives.

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 context is only implied by the name and verb: an agent can infer this tool is for creating pages rather than updating or reading them. There is no explicit guidance about when to prefer this tool over confluence_update_page or how to decide between status values like draft and current.

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