confluence_get_page_outline

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It states 'Get a page outline' implying a read operation, but does not explicitly confirm non-destructiveness, authorization needs, or behavior on invalid pageId. Adequate for a simple read tool but lacks explicit behavioral traits.

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 sentence of 18 words, front-loaded with the purpose. Every word earns its place, no wasted content.

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 low complexity (1 parameter, no output schema), the description explains what it does and returns. However, it lacks details on heading depth, structure of headings[], or pagination, leaving gaps for an agent.

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?

Only one parameter (pageId) with schema description 'Confluence page ID' covering 100%. The description does not add extra meaning beyond the schema, so baseline score 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?

The description clearly states it gets a page outline by parsing headings from body.storage, and mentions returning unified fields plus headings[] for low-token navigation. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like confluence_get_page (full content) or confluence_get_page_section (specific section).

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 implies use for low-token navigation, providing context for when to use it (token efficiency). However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or name alternatives among siblings, leaving some ambiguity.

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