move_page_tool

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden. It discloses authentication requirement, but doesn't mention side effects like redirect creation, talk page behavior, or that the move is irreversible. The schema covers some details, but the description lacks behavioral context beyond the basic action.

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 very brief at two sentences, with no wasted words. The core purpose is front-loaded. However, it could be slightly more informative without losing conciseness, but overall it's efficient.

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?

For a move action with 5 parameters and an output schema, the description is incomplete. It does not mention prerequisites (e.g., page must exist), potential errors (e.g., conflict), or the return value. Sibling tools like delete or create require context, but this tool lacks it.

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 description coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds no parameter information beyond what the schema provides. It does not explain what the parameters do or their implications.

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 'Move (rename) a wiki page', which is a specific verb+resource. It distinguishes from siblings like create, delete, edit, etc. However, it could be more explicit about the scope (e.g., renaming) but overall purpose is clear.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., edit_page_tool for content changes). The description does not mention prerequisites, nor does it differentiate from moving vs. copying. It only states what the tool does, not the appropriate context.

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