Skip to main content
Glama

Confluence

by io.github.pipeworx-io

Confluence Search

confluence_search
Read-onlyIdempotent

Search Confluence pages by keyword or CQL query. Returns matching pages with ID, title, space, and content excerpt.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
cqlYesCQL query string (e.g., "text ~ \"search term\"", "space = DEV AND type = page")
limitNoNumber of results to return (default 25, max 100)

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
totalYesTotal number of search results
resultsYesArray of search result items

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "properties": {
+    "results": {
+      "description": "Array of search result items",
+      "items": {
+        "properties": {
+          "excerpt": {
+            "description": "Content excerpt from search result",
+            "type": [
+              "string",
+              "null"
+            ]
+          },
+          "id": {
+            "description": "Page ID",
+            "type": [
+              "string",
+              "null"
+            ]
+          },
+          "space": {
+            "description": "Space name containing the page",
+            "type": [
+              "string",
+              "null"
+            ]
+          },
+          "status": {
+            "description": "Page status (current, draft, etc)",
+            "type": [
+              "string",
+              "null"
+            ]
+          },
+          "title": {
+            "description": "Page title",
+            "type": [
+              "string",
+              "null"
+            ]
+          },
+          "type": {
+            "description": "Content type (page, attachment, etc)",
+            "type": [
+              "string",
+              "null"
+            ]
+          }
+        },
+        "type": "object"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    },
+    "total": {
+      "description": "Total number of search results",
+      "type": "number"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "total",
+    "results"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}
  2. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / examples
      Added value: +[
+  {
+    "cql": "text ~ \"project roadmap\""
+  },
+  {
+    "cql": "space = ENG AND type = page",
+    "limit": 100
+  }
+]
  3. First observed

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, openWorldHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false, covering core behavioral traits. The description adds that the tool returns an excerpt, which is useful but not transformative. No contradictions.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Two sentences: first defines action and method, second specifies return fields. No filler or repetition. Information is front-loaded and efficiently conveyed.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the presence of an output schema and the tool's low complexity (2 parameters), the description adequately covers what the tool does and what it returns. No missing context needed for correct invocation.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100% with descriptions for both parameters. The description reiterates the concept of keyword or CQL query but does not add new semantics beyond the schema examples. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the action ('Search'), resource ('Confluence pages'), and method ('by keyword or CQL query'). It distinguishes from sibling Confluence tools (create, get, list) and other search tools, making the tool's purpose unambiguous.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., when to use confluence_get_page vs this search). No conditions, prerequisites, or exclusions are mentioned, leaving the agent to infer usage context.

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

All Confluence toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

B3.4/5.0
Disambiguation2/5

The set is dominated by near-overlapping research tools: ask_pipeworx, ask_pipeworx_beta, ask_pipeworx_grounded, deep_research, and validate_claim all answer factual questions with heavily overlapping descriptions, and the six polymarket_* tools plus bet_research form a second confused cluster. The five confluence_* tools are distinct, but an agent would struggle to pick among the research/betting alternatives without reading thousands of words of caveats.

Naming Consistency2/5

Most names are snake_case, but the conventions are mixed: verb_noun (confluence_create_page, validate_claim), noun_verb (bet_research), prefixed nouns (polymarket_arbitrage, pipeworx_feedback), and bare verbs (recall, forget). The glaring issue is that the server is named Confluence yet only 5 of 36 tools carry the confluence_ prefix, leaving the other 31 tools with no thematic prefix and no consistent pattern.

Tool Count2/5

36 tools is already in the 'too many' range, but the mismatch is deeper: only 5 tools relate to Confluence while 31 tools cover an entirely different domain (Pipeworx data research, prediction markets, subscriptions). For a wiki server this is wildly over-scoped; as a combined surface it is bloated and lacks a unifying purpose.

Completeness2/5

For the Confluence domain the surface is incomplete: pages can be created, fetched, listed, and searched, but there is no update_page, delete_page, comment, attachment, or content-type coverage, leaving obvious CRUD dead ends. For the Pipeworx domain, coverage is broad but disorganized, with overlapping research paths and no clear hierarchy.

Resources