confluence_get_page_version

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure, but it only says 'get details.' It does not mention that max_chars may truncate content, what the response contains, or any read-only/reversibility implications.

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 a single efficient sentence that front-loads the core operation. It has no filler or redundancy, though it is brief on details.

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 three parameters, no annotations, no output schema, and zero schema description coverage, one sentence is insufficient. The description leaves max_chars semantics and expected return details unexplained, making the tool harder to invoke correctly.

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%, so the description must compensate, but it does not explain any parameters. page_id and version_number are somewhat inferable from the name and description, but max_chars is entirely unexplained beyond its raw schema constraints.

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 states a clear verb and resource: 'Get details for one historical page version.' This distinguishes it from get_page (current version) and list_versions (listing versions), though 'details' is somewhat vague.

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 phrase 'one historical page version' implies this tool is for retrieving a single specific version rather than a list, giving some usage context. However, it does not name alternatives or explain when to prefer this tool over list_versions or get_content_history.

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