GenFlick

move element

native.move_element

DestructiveIdempotent

Move an existing element or standalone Media file within its tab. Read its location first and supply expected_folder_id (null at root). No content or media is regenerated.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "work_id": "<work_id>",
      "arguments": "<arguments>",
      "expected_catalog_version": "<expected_catalog_version>",
      "read_skills": "<read_skills>",
      "request_key": "<request_key>"
    },
    "name": "native.move_element"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`work_id`	Yes
`arguments`	Yes
`read_skills`	Yes	Exact required native skills and their dependencies, copied from the accepted session bootstrap's skills array. Include only entries in that array. General mcp.* guides and native.{studio}.instructions are guidance, not native skill proofs.
`request_key`	Yes
`publication_proposal_id`	No	For native Social scheduling, the exact server-approved publication proposal. This identifier cannot confer approval by itself.
`expected_catalog_version`	Yes	For a new session, read a studios/{studio}/native/{pack} child toolset and copy invocation.catalog_version from a native tool descriptor. Do not use the top-level library version. For calls in an existing session, use that session proposal's catalog_version.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 5, 2026

TDQS

B3.4/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and readOnlyHint=false, so the safety profile is largely covered. The description adds one genuinely useful behavioral fact ('No content or media is regenerated'), clarifying this is a metadata relocation rather than a re-render. However, with destructiveHint=true it never explains what can be broken or invalidated by moving an element, nor how the required proof/session parameters (read_skills, request_key, expected_catalog_version) gate the call.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Three short sentences with the operation stated first and the precondition second; nothing is redundant. 'Within its tab' and 'standalone Media file' are slightly compressed phrasing, but no sentence is wasted.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a 6-parameter tool with a nested arguments object and required session-proof fields, the description covers only expected_folder_id. An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained, and annotations carry the safety profile. The gap is that four of the five required top-level parameters are never mentioned, so the description is only adequate, not complete.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 50%, so the description must compensate somewhat; it does explain expected_folder_id semantics ('null at root') and the read-before-write pattern behind it. It does not clarify the crucial distinction between folder_id, folder_path, and expected_folder_id, nor what lane or item_id select. That is the main ambiguity an agent faces here and it remains undocumented.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description gives a specific verb and resource ('Move an existing element or standalone Media file') plus a scoping constraint ('within its tab'), so an agent knows this is a relocation operation on an element, not a content edit. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from near siblings such as native.move_document, native.move_documents, or native.organize_project, leaving the boundary to inference.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The only guidance is a workflow precondition: 'Read its location first and supply expected_folder_id (null at root)'. That is useful sequencing, but there is no statement of when to prefer this tool over organize_project or bulk move siblings, and no exclusion for cases like moving across tabs or bulk relocation.

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

All GenFlick tools Inspect

Try in Browser

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?