Get Wiki page-move status

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint and openWorldHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds real context beyond that: it is a polling endpoint, the terminal status values, what result.page_count reports on success, and a warning that the endpoint is undocumented and may change. Minor gap: no guidance on polling interval or backoff.

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?

Front-loads what the tool is, then the polling contract, then the success semantics, then the caveat. Every sentence adds information, though the operation.id reference is slightly repetitive with the schema description.

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?

With no output schema, the description carries the return-value burden and does so: it names the status field, its terminal values, and result.page_count on success. Nothing needed to call and interpret this tool 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?

Schema coverage is 100% and the schema already defines task_id as 'Task id from a page-move trigger (operation.id)', which the description essentially restates. Baseline 3 applies since the schema carries the parameter documentation.

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?

States a specific verb+resource: retrieving the status of an async Wiki page-move operation. It distinguishes itself from the sibling operation-poller tools (wiki_operations_clone_get, wiki_operations_gridclone_get) by naming the producing tool pages_move and the exact fields to inspect. An agent can tell instantly what this does and what feeds it.

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?

Explicitly says to poll this tool ('re-read until status is success or failed') and identifies the prerequisite: the operation.id returned by pages_move. It also states the terminating conditions, so when-to-use and when-to-stop are both spelled out.

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