confluence_upload_attachment

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

The description does not disclose behavioral traits beyond the fact that it uploads a file. Important details are missing, such as whether it overwrites existing attachments with the same name, if there are file size limits, or any authentication requirements. There are no annotations to supplement this.

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 fairly concise with a clear Args section. However, some redundancy exists (the docstring repeats 'Upload a file as an attachment'), and it could be more streamlined. It is appropriately front-loaded.

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 an upload tool with three parameters and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It lacks details on overwrite behavior, error handling, supported file types, and the response format. Given typical upload tools, more context is needed for an agent to use it correctly.

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 description adds meaning to all three parameters: it clarifies that 'page_id' can be a numeric ID or a Confluence URL, that 'file_path' is a local path, and that 'comment' is optional. However, with 0% schema description coverage, it could provide more detail, such as expected file formats or URL formats.

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's purpose: uploading a file as an attachment to a Confluence page. The verb 'upload' and the resource 'attachment' are specific. However, it does not distinguish from sibling tools like 'confluence_download_attachment' or 'confluence_delete_attachment', which are clearly different actions.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of prerequisites, such as needing edit permissions on the page, or when it is appropriate to use this tool over other attachment-related tools.

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