Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
mcp-confluence

mcp-confluence

by sirexelite
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Remote

Создать страницу

confluence_create_page

Create a new Confluence page with XHTML content. Specify space, title, and optional parent to organize pages.

Instructions

Создаёт новую страницу. Тело — в storage-формате Confluence (XHTML).

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "spaceKey": "<spaceKey>",
      "title": "<title>",
      "body": "<body>"
    },
    "name": "confluence_create_page"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
bodyYesСодержимое в storage-формате (XHTML)
titleYesЗаголовок страницы
parentIdNoID родительской страницы (необязательно)
spaceKeyYesКлюч пространства

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

B3.3/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behaviors. It only states the creation action but omits effects like whether it replaces existing pages, permission requirements, or return values. The body format reference is already in the schema.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Two very short sentences with no fluff. Front-loaded with the primary action and immediately clarifies an important detail (body format). Every word earns its place.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a simple create tool, the description covers the core action and body format. However, it lacks information about return values (e.g., page ID), error conditions, and whether there are any preconditions. The absence of annotations increases the burden, which is not fully met.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100% (all parameters have descriptions). The description adds that the body is in storage format, but this is redundant with the schema's body description. No additional semantic value beyond the schema.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the verb 'создаёт' (creates) and the resource 'новую страницу' (new page), and specifies the body format as storage-format (XHTML). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like update, delete, etc.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives (e.g., update_page, search). The description does not mention prerequisites or context such as creating a page under a parent or checking for duplicates.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools