confluence_get_page

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It communicates that this is a minimal single-page fetch and implicitly states what it does not include (ancestors, attachments, comments). However, it does not disclose output format, possible truncation behavior, error conditions, or effects of the many include flags, so transparency is partial.

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 two sentences with no redundancy. The core behavior is front-loaded, and the sibling alternative is mentioned only after the primary usage context is established.

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?

This tool has 10 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, so the description needs to provide significant context to make the tool safely and correctly invocable. It covers selection criteria well but gives almost no guidance on parameter usage, return shape, or edge-case behavior, leaving the agent under-equipped for actual 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 vaguely references 'a specific field set' and 'page body'. The 10 parameters, including status, version, max_chars, body_format, and include_* flags, are left entirely to the agent to infer. This is insufficient compensation for the complete lack of schema descriptions.

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 opens with 'Primitive: get one Confluence page by ID', clearly stating a specific verb, resource, and retrieval method. It also distinguishes itself from confluence_get_page_context by noting that this tool returns a single page rather than ancestors, attachments, or comments.

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 explicitly tells the agent when to use this tool ('when a single page body or a specific field set is all that is needed') and names the preferred alternative for richer context needs. This is direct, actionable guidance that helps route between siblings.

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