confluence_create

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the tool returns the new page's ID, which is useful. However, it omits details about error handling (e.g., duplicate titles), required permissions, idempotency, or rate limits. The mention of mirroring a CLI command adds minimal context.

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 concise with two sentences that front-load the core purpose and then clarify the format nuance. It efficiently conveys key information without unnecessary words.

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 complexity (5 parameters, no annotations, no output schema), the description is incomplete. It does not explain what happens on duplicate page names, required permissions, rate limits, or how to handle errors. The reference to an external resource helps but does not cover these operational aspects.

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?

The input schema has 100% description coverage with detailed explanations for each parameter. The tool description adds little beyond summarizing the formats; thus, the schema already provides sufficient meaning, and the description does not significantly enhance parameter understanding.

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 creates a Confluence page and specifies the two input formats (JFM markdown or ADF JSON). It provides enough detail to understand the tool's core function, but does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like `confluence_write`.

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 explains the input format (JFM vs wiki) and points to a resource for syntax, which helps in correct usage. However, it does not provide guidance on when to use this tool over alternatives like `confluence_write` or `confluence_comment_add`, nor any exclusions.

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