confluence_update_table_cell

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It explains that page_id can be a URL or numeric ID, but does not cover atomicity, formatting preservation, error handling for missing cells, or permission requirements. Significant gaps remain.

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 extremely concise: a single-sentence purpose followed by a clear bulleted list of parameter descriptions. It is front-loaded and contains no redundant 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?

Given the lack of annotations and output schema, the description should cover expected return values, error conditions, and side effects. It does not, leaving the agent to guess the behavior on failure or success, which is inadequate for a mutation tool.

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. It explains all five parameters: page_id (URL or numeric), row (zero-based), col (zero-based), value (new text), and table_index (defaults to first table). This adds complete meaning beyond the bare schema.

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 it updates a single cell in a table on a Confluence page. The verb 'update' and resource 'single cell' are specific, and it distinguishes from sibling tools like insert_table_row and delete_table_row.

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 implies its usage by listing parameters, but does not explicitly state when to use it over alternatives, such as for updating a cell vs inserting a row. The sibling tools list suggests other table operations, but no direct guidance is given.

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