Move or rename a page

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

The description discloses the critical non-obvious side effect that internal links to the old path are not rewritten, which is valuable and not present in the annotations. This directly informs the agent's pre-call decisions. It does not mention the output or confirm-token flow, but idempotentHint=false already signals the non-idempotent nature.

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 two focused sentences with the core move semantics first and the important caveat second. There is no filler, tautology, or unnecessary repetition of parameter details already covered by the schema.

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?

The core operation and the main side effect are covered, and the schema fully documents parameters. However, with no output schema and no explicit prose about the two-call confirm-token execution flow, the agent must infer the exact response shape and call sequence, which is a notable gap for a mutating tool.

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 input schema has 100% description coverage with detailed explanations for all six parameters, including path formatting, locale defaulting, and the confirm_token workflow. The prose description only restates the high-level effect and therefore adds little beyond the schema.

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 specific action, "Moves a page to another path, another locale, or both," which clearly identifies the resource and the operation. It differentiates from content-editing tools like update_page by focusing on page identity and location, though it does not explicitly name a sibling alternative.

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 warning to check list_page_links first when link integrity matters is a useful conditional guideline for safe use. However, the description does not explicitly contrast this tool with alternatives such as update_page or migrate_pages_locale, so the agent must infer when move_page is preferred over other page operations.

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