List attachments for a page, returning file name, size, content type, and markdown path for each file.
List attachments for a page. Returns name, size, content type, and the relative markdown path to reference each file.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| pageId | Yes | ||
| collectiveId | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.2.2Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the read-only nature is covered. The description adds behavioral context by specifying exactly what is returned (name, size, content type, markdown path), which is beyond the annotations. It does not contradict the annotations and provides useful detail about the output.
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 concise sentence that front-loads the action and includes the key output details. There is no wasted wording, making it highly efficient and easy to parse.
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 simple read-only list operation with two parameters, the description covers the purpose and the return fields. It lacks an explanation of collectiveId, which is a completeness gap, but given the simplicity of the tool and the presence of annotations, it is mostly adequate. The missing parameter clarification prevents a perfect score.
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 must compensate for parameter meanings. It explains 'page' implicitly through 'for a page', but does not clarify the role of collectiveId, which is a required integer parameter. The description adds minimal semantic value beyond the schema, leaving the collectiveId parameter under-documented.
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 action 'List' and the resource 'attachments for a page', and it enumerates the returned fields (name, size, content type, relative markdown path). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_attachment (single attachment) and delete_attachment, making its purpose unambiguous.
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 conveys when to use this tool: whenever you need a list of attachments for a page. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, but the context is clear given the sibling tools like upload_attachment and get_attachment. It lacks explicit when-not-to-use guidance, so it earns a 4 rather than a 5.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.