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

The description states that it is state-changing and updates location/order directly after authorization, which is useful behavioral context. The annotations already indicate non-read-only and non-destructive, so the added explanation about immediate side effects and required parameters is above baseline.

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 three concise sentences with the primary use case front-loaded. No redundant or overly verbose content; every sentence contributes useful information.

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 simple four-parameter mutation with no output schema, the description covers what, when, required/optional parameters, and side effects. It does not explain edge cases like child items or order semantics, but this is not a significant gap given the schema and annotations.

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 descriptions already cover all four parameters, and the description reinforces that space_id and item_id are required while parent_id and order are optional. It adds extra semantic value by indicating that parent_id/order should come from list-space-documents.

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 the action ('move, nest, unnest, reorder, or reposition') and the resource ('Space page/document, folder, or external link'). It also identifies the target context with 'Use this when', making it easy to select over siblings like update-space-item.

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?

It explicitly defines when to use the tool with a concrete list of user intents. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or when-not-to-use cases, but the 'Use this when' phrasing provides strong guidance.

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