confluence_get_page

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

With no annotations provided, the description must carry the full burden. It discloses that the page content is included in the response, which is a key behavioral trait. However, it does not mention error behavior, authentication requirements, or whether only content or also metadata is returned, leaving some behavior unspecified.

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 a single, well-structured sentence that front-loads the action and resource. Every word adds value: 'Get' specifies the operation, 'numeric page ID' clarifies the parameter, and 'including stored page content' sets expectations. There is no filler or 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?

For a tool with one parameter, no output schema, and no annotations, the description covers the basic purpose and parameter but lacks details about the response structure or edge cases (e.g., what happens if page not found). It is sufficient for a simple read operation, but could be more complete by mentioning the format of the content or expected errors.

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 provides no parameter description (0% coverage), but the description adds that the page ID is numeric, which is meaningful because the schema only declares a string. This helps validate the input. It could go further by explaining what a page ID is or how to find it, but for a single parameter, this is adequate.

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 uses a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('a Confluence page by numeric page ID') and further clarifies that it returns stored page content. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like confluence_search, which would search for pages rather than fetch by ID.

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 context of use is clear: when you have a numeric page ID and need the page content, use this tool. It does not explicitly mention alternatives, but the sibling name confluence_search implies the alternative for search-focused tasks. No exclusions or when-not-to-use conditions are stated, so it does not fully reach a 5.

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