Move Page

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

Annotations already mark the tool as destructive (`destructiveHint: true`), lowering the bar. The description adds behavioral context: it explains the return value (JSON string) and error scenarios (ValueError for missing parameters or client misconfiguration), which are not covered by 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 description is structured with clear sections (Args, Returns, Raises) and is concise. Every sentence adds informative value without redundancy. It is well-organized for an AI agent to parse.

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 the input schema fully describes parameters, an output schema exists, and annotations are present, the description is complete. It covers error handling, return type, and parameter logic, leaving no major gaps for correct 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?

Input schema description coverage is 100%, but the description adds value by explaining parameter nuances: e.g., 'If omitted with target_space_key, moves to space root' for `target_parent_id`, and the meanings of position options ('append', 'above', 'below'). This goes beyond the schema's basic 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 clearly states the tool's action: 'Move a Confluence page to a new parent or space.' This verb-resource combination is precise and distinguishes it from siblings like `confluence_update_page` (which modifies content) and `confluence_delete_page` (which removes pages).

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 implies usage by stating the tool's purpose, but it does not explicitly compare with alternatives or state when not to use it. It includes error conditions (e.g., need for at least one of target_parent_id or target_space_key) which aids in proper invocation, but lacks direct guidance relative to sibling tools.

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