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

The description uses 'Move' which implies a destructive operation (removal from original location), but the annotation destructiveHint=false indicates the tool is not destructive. This direct contradiction misleads the agent about the tool's effect.

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 extremely concise, with four short sentences each adding a distinct piece of information: purpose, identifier source, abort condition, and ownership constraint. No unnecessary words or 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 simple two-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers key aspects: action, input provenance, and constraints. It lacks details on success response but that's not critical for agent usage.

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 description adds some meaning by stating creationIdentifiers come from other specific tools and targetFolderReference must belong to the user. However, it doesn't explain the exact format or any additional details beyond what the schema already provides (param names and types).

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 'Move creations into targetFolderReference', specifying the verb (move), resource (creations), and destination. It also mentions identifier provenance from images_generate/creations_search, distinguishing it from sibling creation tools like get, search, or list.

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 usage context by specifying that identifiers must come from images_generate or creations_search, and states constraints: foreign identifiers cause an abort and target folder must belong to the user. While it doesn't explicitly list when not to use it, these conditions effectively guide proper usage.

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