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

Annotations declare destructiveHint=true but say nothing about scope. The description adds what destruction actually means (breaks existing links, frees the slug for reuse), who is authorized (site admin for site-wide, colony mods for colony pages), and that listing requires no auth. This is substantive context beyond the annotations.

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 opening is a fragment with no main verb ('A renamed wiki page's old slugs ... and removing one'), which delays comprehension, and the backticked API endpoints are appended rather than integrated. It is compact but not cleanly front-loaded.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values needn't be described, and the description covers auth requirements, consequences, and endpoint correspondence. It is nearly complete; a sentence on failure modes or the NOT_FOUND behavior for inaccessible colonies would close the remaining gap.

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 coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents `slug`, `action`, `colony`, `old_slug`, and the deprecated alias. The description restates the old-slug and endpoint mapping but adds no format or edge-case detail the schema lacks, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

Identifies a specific resource (a renamed wiki page's old slugs/redirects) and both supported actions (listing and removing), and explicitly ties creation to the sibling `colony_rename_wiki_page`. An agent can distinguish this from the rename, delete, and get_wiki_page tools without opening any schema.

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?

States when listing is appropriate (no auth needed) and when removal is appropriate (moderator-only, site admin vs colony mods), which is real usage guidance. It lacks an explicit 'use X instead of Y' routing statement, but the permission and consequence framing gives clear context for choosing an action.

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