confluence_children

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses mutual exclusivity of id and space, optional recursion, and max depth semantics, but does not mention pagination, sort order, or error behavior. These are relevant for a listing tool, so the transparency is decent but not rich.

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 three sentences, each with a distinct purpose: core usage, ideal use case, and alternative. Examples are inline and the text is front-loaded with the main action. There is no fluff.

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?

The tool has no output schema and no annotations, so the description is critical. It covers both input modes, recursion, and sibling differentiation. The only gap is the absence of return shape or pagination details, but a simple list tool can be considered adequately specified.

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 coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description goes beyond the schema by providing example values for id and space and explicitly linking max_depth to recursion ('Maximum tree depth when recursive is set'). This adds meaningful usage context.

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 children') and the two invocation modes (page ID or space key), with concrete examples. It also distinguishes itself from confluence_space_pages, making its role as a hierarchical traversal tool 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?

Explicit guidance is given: 'so this is the tool for walking a page hierarchy' and a direct alternative is named: 'To enumerate EVERY page in a space (flat, with status/sort filters and cursor pagination) use confluence_space_pages instead.' This fully satisfies when-to-use vs alternatives.

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