Retrieve a Confluence page by ID to access its title, space, version, URL, and full body content in storage format, enabling AI assistants to read and work with existing documentation.
Read a Confluence page by its ID. Returns the page title, space, version, URL, and full body content in Confluence storage format (HTML).
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| pageId | Yes | The ID of the Confluence page to read. |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v3.1.2Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description must carry behavioral burden. It discloses the return format (storage format HTML) and lists returned fields, which is useful. However, it doesn't mention permission requirements, error behavior, or whether it's read-only (implied by 'Read' but not explicit). It adds some value but has gaps for a no-annotation tool.
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?
Two sentences, front-loaded with the core action and followed by return details. No wasted words, though it could be slightly more streamlined.
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?
For a simple single-parameter read tool with no output schema, the description is adequate. It covers what the tool does and what it returns, but lacks usage context and permission details that would be helpful given no annotations.
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 parameter is fully documented. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema provides. Baseline 3 is appropriate.
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?
States a specific verb (Read) and resource (Confluence page by ID). It doesn't explicitly differentiate from siblings like get_confluence_page_versions or search_confluence, but the operation is clear.
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?
No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like search_confluence or get_confluence_page_versions. It simply states what it does without context about when it's appropriate.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.