get_site_moves

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states that it returns a list of SiteMoveSettings and raises a BingWebmasterError on failure, but it does not explicitly confirm it is read-only, mention any permissions or side effects, or describe the structure of the returned list. Minimal transparency beyond the error case.

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 concise and well-structured with explicit Args, Returns, and Raises sections. It contains no fluff and is appropriately sized for a simple getter. However, it could be slightly more informative about usage context without becoming verbose.

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 tool's simplicity and the presence of an output schema, the description is adequate but not complete. It lacks any mention of when to use this tool relative to siblings, such as the relationship with submit_site_move. It also does not indicate whether the site must be verified or any other preconditions. The error case is covered, but broader context is missing.

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?

The schema has zero description coverage for the site_url parameter, but the description explicitly documents it as 'The URL of the site'. This adds meaning that the schema lacks. The return type is also specified, giving clarity on what the parameter influences.

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 (get) and resource (site move information) scoped to a specific site. It is distinguishable from siblings like submit_site_move, but it does not explicitly name an alternative or contrast itself. The purpose is unambiguous.

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?

No guidance is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as submit_site_move or other getter tools. The description does not mention prerequisites, typical use cases, or conditions that would make this the right choice. It only describes the action itself.

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