notion_move_page

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

With no annotations provided, the description must carry the full burden. It outlines the mechanics (new row for database) but does not disclose side effects such as whether the page is removed from its original location, permission requirements, or whether the operation is reversible. This is a significant gap for a mutation tool, similar to the update_drive example.

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 compact, using a single-purpose sentence followed by a clean parameter list. Every line earns its place; there is no fluff. The formatting makes the parameter semantics easy to scan.

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, the description covers the core action and parameters adequately. However, it omits potential edge cases (e.g., circular moves, self-parenting) and does not describe the output or failure modes, though an output schema exists. More detail on side effects would make it more complete, but it's minimally viable.

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 description adds substantial meaning beyond the raw schema by explaining each parameter: page_id identifies the page, new_parent_page_id specifies the target page, and new_parent_database_id specifies the target database. It also clarifies the 'as a new row' behavior and the exclusivity constraint, which are not present in the schema. Schema description coverage is 0%, so this compensation is essential.

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 opens with a clear verb+resource: 'Move a Notion page to a new parent page or database.' This distinguishes it from sibling tools like create/update/archive. It leaves no ambiguity about the tool's core function.

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 provides specific guidance on how to use the two parent parameters, noting that only one should be set. While it doesn't explicitly mention alternatives, the unique 'move' operation makes alternatives unnecessary. It gives clear context on the condition for using each parent argument.

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