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

The description adds no behavioral details beyond the word 'move'. Annotations indicate readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false, but the description does not explain what happens to folder contents, whether overwriting occurs, or error handling. It is not contradictory, but it is uninformative.

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 a single concise sentence with no fluff, but it is under-specified to the point of being minimally helpful. It is not overly verbose, but the lack of additional context makes it less effective than a slightly longer, more informative description.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (2 params, no output schema), the description is still inadequate. It does not mention prerequisites, side effects (e.g., recursive move), return values, or edge cases such as moving to the same location or a nonexistent target. An AI agent would need external knowledge to use this 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 has two integer parameters with no descriptions, and schema description coverage is 0%. The description mentions 'another location' but does not explicitly map 'folder' to the source and 'target' to the destination, nor explain that these are IDs. It fails to compensate for the schema gap.

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 the action (move) and the resource (folder), and is specific enough to distinguish from sibling tools like move_file and move_queue_item. However, 'another location' could be more explicit (e.g., 'to a different parent folder').

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool vs alternatives, or any prerequisites (e.g., whether the target folder must exist). The description is a single sentence with no context on conditions or exclusions.

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