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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the operation is actually a copy+delete ('file is copied to the new path and the source is removed'), that linked upload sessions are updated, and that the cost is 0 tokens. These are significant behavioral details beyond the basic purpose.

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 concise, front-loaded with the primary action, and every sentence provides useful information—purpose, how to obtain source, behavior (copy+remove, session update), and cost. No wasted words.

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 move tool with two well-documented parameters, an output schema present, and no nested objects or enums, the description covers all necessary context: source retrieval, destination constraints (implied by schema), side effects, and cost. It is complete enough for an agent to invoke 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?

Schema description coverage is 100% and both parameters are already well-described in the schema. The description adds minimal extra meaning beyond reinforcing that source_file_name comes from files.list_uploaded_files, 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 explicitly states the tool 'Move a stored file to a new account-relative path', which clearly identifies the action and resource. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like files.upload_file, files.delete_file, and files.download_file.

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 provides clear context by instructing to pass source_file_name from files.list_uploaded_files and destination_file_name, and explains the move semantics. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use this tool or name alternatives, so it falls short of a 5.

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