Get Confluence Comments

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

Annotations already declare read-only and non-destructive behavior. The description adds valuable technical detail about footer vs. inline comments and the markerRef UUID, which is not visible in annotations or schema alone. No contradiction found.

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?

Three concise sentences with front-loaded purpose and zero fluff. The structure efficiently conveys purpose, return content, and special input handling.

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 rich schema and output schema, the description adds the key non-obvious behaviors (inline markerRef and reply thread handling) without redundant details. It fully equips an agent to use the tool 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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the description adds no additional parameter meaning. The schema already explains id, depth, limit, start, and save_path. The tool description simply restates the id behavior already present in the 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 the tool retrieves comments by content ID, distinguishing between page comments and comment threads. The verb 'Get' and specific resource make it distinct from siblings like get_content_by_id or search.

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?

Provides concrete usage context: passing a page ID returns comments, passing a comment ID returns its reply thread. It does not explicitly name alternative tools, but the behavior is clear enough for an agent to select this tool when comments are needed.

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