Retrieve the ancestor chain for a Confluence page or folder to understand its hierarchy. Use when you need parent and grandparent content IDs for navigation or context.
Primitive: get the ancestor chain for a page or folder. When the surrounding page context is also needed, prefer confluence_get_page_context.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| max_chars | No | ||
| content_id | Yes | ||
| content_type | No | page |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are present, so the description carries the burden. 'Primitive: get the ancestor chain' signals a non-mutating read operation and scopes it to page/folder. However, it does not disclose ordering, whether the current node is included, auth requirements, or behavior tied to max_chars.
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 short, front-loaded sentences with no filler. The purpose statement comes before the routing advice, and every word earns its place; slightly more parameter detail could be added without hurting conciseness.
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 tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description omits essential invocation context: what max_chars controls, the content_type default, and the shape/order of the returned ancestor chain. It is adequate for choosing between tools but not fully sufficient for correct invocation.
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 description coverage is 0%, and the description only indirectly maps 'page or folder' to content_type. It never explains content_id semantics or the purpose/limits of max_chars, so the agent is left to infer key parameter behavior.
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 'get' and resource 'ancestor chain for a page or folder'. Explicitly differentiates from sibling confluence_get_page_context by noting when it is not the right tool. This is unambiguous and distinguishes it among many siblings.
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?
Directly provides a selection rule: 'When the surrounding page context is also needed, prefer confluence_get_page_context.' This tells the agent when to use this tool and when to choose the alternative.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.