Move SEVERAL assignment folders under a new parent (or to the root) in ONE call. Anti-cycle: a folder cannot land inside its own subtree (those are reported as errors, the rest proceed). Creator owners are kept (dormant while nested).
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| folders | Yes | Folders to move (id, name or full path each) | |
| destination | Yes | Destination parent folder (id, name or full path), or 'root' to move them to the root |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already indicate the operation is idempotent and non-destructive. The description goes beyond annotations by disclosing anti-cycle behavior, partial-success semantics ('those are reported as errors, the rest proceed'), and ownership behavior ('Creator owners are kept, dormant while nested'). This gives the agent valuable expectations beyond structured fields.
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 and front-loaded with the primary purpose. Each sentence adds distinct useful information: batch scope, anti-cycle behavior, and ownership behavior. There is no filler or redundant repetition.
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 two-parameter tool with 100% schema description coverage and rich annotations, the description covers the essential behavioral nuances: batch semantics, root destination, cycle handling, partial failure, and ownership side effects. Nothing critical is missing for an agent to call the tool correctly.
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 already documents both parameters fully and even explains the 'root' special value for destination. The description reinforces that multiple folders are expected but adds little semantic detail beyond the schema, so baseline 3 is appropriate.
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 verb ('Move'), a clear resource ('SEVERAL assignment folders'), and the target context ('under a new parent (or to the root) in ONE call'). It clearly differentiates itself from the singular sibling move_assignment_to_folder by emphasizing batch moving.
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 clearly implies this tool is for batch moving multiple assignment folders in one operation, and it mentions the special destination 'root'. However, it does not explicitly name alternative tools like move_assignment_to_folder or state when to prefer one over the other, so some usage guidance is left to inference.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Each tool has a distinct target resource/action, and the descriptions are unusually explicit about differences (e.g., 'Distinct from the watchlist', 'Separate list from list_tags'). A few pairs are still easy to confuse without careful reading: delete_folder vs delete_folders differ only by singular/plural, and the three download-URL tools (get_post_download_url, get_asset_download_url, get_my_account_post_download_url) plus the category/tag families require attention to pick correctly.
The snake_case verb_noun pattern is followed consistently throughout (list_*, get_*, create_*, update_*, delete_*, set_*, tag_*). Minor deviations: archive_folder and archive_my_accounts also perform restore despite their names, delete_folder/delete_folders split one operation by cardinality, and tag_posts/tag_my_account use a different verb style than the set_* family for metadata mutations.
At 56 tools, this far exceeds the 25+ threshold for 'too many,' even though the server spans multiple subdomains (watchlist, analysis, assignments, folders, my accounts, assets, Drive, categories/tags). Obvious consolidation candidates exist — delete_folder/delete_folders, the three download-URL getters, and the parallel list_my_account_* listers — and the sheer surface is heavy for an agent to navigate.
Core workflows are thoroughly covered with no dead ends: watchlist → analyze → assign → folder → track → approve has full lifecycle support, including reversible archive vs permanent delete choices. Minor gaps exist but are work-aroundable: no create/update for my accounts or models (app-side OAuth/admin only), no way to delete a viral post or a post note, and asset upload only happens in the app.
