confluence_search

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint, destructiveHint, idempotentHint, and openWorldHint. Description adds value by specifying CQL syntax and examples, but does not disclose rate limits, permissions, or behavior on empty results.

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?

Description is two sentences plus example queries; efficient but not maximally structured. Front-loaded with purpose, but examples could be formatted more concisely.

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 presence of an output schema and clear parameter details, the description is fairly complete. It lacks details on pagination or response formatting beyond noting the response_format parameter.

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% (possibly errant since schema has descriptions), but description compensates with concrete CQL examples explaining how to construct queries. The parameter 'cql' is well-illustrated.

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?

Description clearly states 'Search Confluence using Confluence Query Language (CQL)' and provides example queries. It distinguishes from sibling tools like confluence_get_page or jira_search_issues by specifying the resource (Confluence) and action (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?

Example queries implicitly guide usage but there is no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance relative to siblings. No exclusions or alternatives are mentioned.

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