Create Confluence Article

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=false, and openWorldHint=true, so the mutation/safety profile is covered structurally. The description adds one piece of genuinely new context – the return shape {id, title, url} – which matters because there is no output schema, but it says nothing about duplicate-creation risk on retry, required permissions, or space visibility.

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?

Two short sentences, no filler, with the action stated first and the return value second. Every clause carries 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?

Adequate for a straightforward create tool whose schema is fully documented and whose annotations cover mutation semantics. However, with no output schema the return description is a terse inline list, and nothing explains what happens on a title collision or whether the created page is draft vs published – gaps an agent invoking a create operation would benefit from knowing.

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%, and the schema itself already explains the non-obvious bits (numeric spaceId, markdown in body, how to resolve a space key). The description adds no parameter information beyond this, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Create a new Confluence page'), which clearly separates it from jcm_getArticle and jcm_updateArticle among the siblings. It stops short of explicitly contrasting with those siblings, so it is clear but not fully differentiated by name.

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 when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance is given, and no prerequisites or alternatives (e.g. jcm_updateArticle for existing pages) are named. The agent must infer the usage context entirely from the verb.

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