confluence_get_space

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does convey that the tool returns a space record and is a 'primitive' (minimal) fetch, which implies a read-only operation. However, it does not mention response format, pagination, rate limits, error behavior, or the meaning of the various include flags. It adds some context but leaves significant behavioral aspects undisclosed.

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 tightly written sentences with no filler. The key information ('get one Confluence space by ID') is front-loaded, and the usage caveat and alternative follow efficiently. Every sentence earns its place.

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?

The tool has 7 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, yet the description does not explain the optional parameters, the return value, or any permissions or side effects. While the primary use case is clearly stated, the lack of detail on the remaining parameters and expected behavior leaves the definition incomplete for an agent that needs to call it 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 for the undocumented parameters. The description only references 'by ID,' which maps to 'space_id,' but says nothing about 'max_chars,' 'include_icon,' 'description_format,' 'include_operations,' 'include_properties,' or 'include_permissions.' An agent cannot infer the meaning or format of these parameters from the description, so it fails to compensate for the coverage gap.

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 specific verb ('get'), a specific resource ('one Confluence space'), and the exact access pattern ('by ID'). It also explicitly distinguishes itself from the sibling tool 'confluence_get_space_overview' by scoping this to 'when only the space record is needed.' An agent can clearly tell what this tool does and how it differs from the most similar alternative.

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 gives explicit usage context: use this when you need only the space record, and prefer 'confluence_get_space_overview' when first understanding a space and its structure. This clearly tells the agent when to select this tool versus an alternative, which is exactly what the dimension asks for.

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