Move Item Between Inventory Slots

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

Annotations already indicate mutation (readOnlyHint=false) and non-destructiveness (destructiveHint=false). The description adds a valuable slot map and a return message type, but does not disclose edge-case behaviors such as whether items swap or stack when the target slot is occupied, nor what the message content means. No contradiction with annotations.

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: first the action, then the slot map, then the return type. No wasted words or redundant repetitions of the schema.

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 2-parameter tool the description is mostly adequate, but it omits important operational details: what happens when moving to a non-empty slot (swap, stack, or drop), behavior on invalid slots, and the meaning of the returned message. Since there is no output schema, the vague 'Returns: { message }' does not fully satisfy the need for return-value documentation.

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 only provides integer ranges, but the description fully compensates by mapping every slot number to an inventory region (0 crafting output, 1-4 crafting grid, 5-8 armor, 9-35 main inventory, 36-44 hotbar, 45 off-hand). This makes the parameters' meaning explicit and actionable.

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 ('Moves an item stack'), the resource ('inventory slot'), and the purpose ('for organizing the hotbar/inventory'). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools by focusing on internal inventory reorganization rather than tossing, equipping, or container transfers.

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 phrase 'for organizing the hotbar/inventory' provides a clear context for when to use this tool. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or point to alternatives like container_deposit/withdraw for container-related moves.

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