Playbook

Move assets

move_assets

DestructiveIdempotent

Move one or more assets to a target board. Accepts an array of asset tokens and the destination board token. Requires a token with the write scope. The caller must have update permission on every source asset. Moves nothing if the destination board is read-only, if an asset or the destination is in a trashed library, or if moving archived assets out would exceed the workspace's asset limit.

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": {
      "asset_tokens": "<asset_tokens>",
      "collection_token": "<collection_token>"
    },
    "name": "move_assets"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`asset_tokens`	Yes	Asset tokens to move
`organization`	No	Workspace slug, as returned by list_organizations. Omit it when the account has a single workspace — it is then resolved from your token. Pass it only when the account has several, or when you mean a workspace other than the obvious one.
`collection_token`	Yes	Destination board token

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedNov 3, 2026
- removedInput schema / additionalProperties
```
Removed value: -false
```

Changed3 schema fields changedOct 5, 2026

addedInput schema / additionalProperties
```
Added value: +false
```

removedInput schema / properties / context

Removed value: -{
-  "description": "Explain why you are calling this tool and how it fits into the user's overall goal. This parameter is used for analytics and user intent tracking. YOU MUST provide 15-25 words (count carefully). NEVER use first person ('I', 'we', 'you') - maintain third-person perspective. NEVER include sensitive information such as credentials, passwords, or personal data. Example (20 words): \"Searching across the organization's repositories to find all open issues related to performance complaints and latency issues for team prioritization.\"",
-  "type": "string"
-}

changedInput schema / required

Previous value: -[
-  "asset_tokens",
-  "collection_token",
-  "context"
-]New value: +[
+  "asset_tokens",
+  "collection_token"
+]

First observedOct 2, 2026

TDQS

A4/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the annotations (destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=true), the description discloses the required auth scope, the per-asset permission requirement, and four distinct no-op conditions including read-only destinations, trashed libraries, and workspace asset limits. That is exactly the behavioral context an agent needs before issuing a destructive, hard-to-undo batch mutation.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

Four sentences with zero filler: the action and inputs come first, then the auth requirement, then the failure conditions. Every sentence carries information an agent would otherwise have to guess.

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

Completeness4/5

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

For a 3-parameter destructive mutation with no output schema, the definition covers action, inputs, auth, permissions, and failure modes. The remaining gap is that the description never addresses partial success within the batch of asset tokens, which matters for a destructive multi-item operation.

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 description coverage is 100%, and the schema itself already elaborates the optional organization parameter at length. The description only restates that an array of asset tokens and a destination board token are accepted, adding no new format, ordering, or limit semantics, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

"Move one or more assets to a target board" gives a specific verb plus resource and makes the batch nature and destination explicit. It is clearly separable from siblings like copy_assets or add_asset_permalinks by implication, but it never names an alternative operation, so the differentiation is inferred rather than stated.

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 description supplies real preconditions (write scope, update permission on every source asset) and lists the conditions under which nothing happens, which effectively tells the caller when this call will fail. However, it never says when to choose move_assets over a sibling such as copy_assets plus archive_assets, so the when-to-use guidance is only implied.

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

All Playbook 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?