move_window_to_workspace

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It usefully discloses that the focused window is the default target and that the view remains unchanged, but it omits failure conditions, workspace validity requirements, and any other side effects.

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?

Two short sentences are front-loaded with the main action, and the key scoping detail about the view follows immediately. There is no wasted text.

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?

The tool is simple, has only two parameters, and includes an output schema, so return-value explanation is unnecessary. However, the description leaves workspace semantics and window_id null behavior unclear, which matters given zero schema description coverage.

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 0%, so the description must compensate for both parameters. It partially explains window_id by saying the focused window is the default, but it does not clarify whether workspace is an index, ID, or existing workspace, nor does it explain null handling for window_id.

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 and resource: moving a window to another workspace. It also clarifies that the view stays put, which distinguishes it from a workspace-switching operation, though it does not explicitly name sibling tools such as view_workspace or move_resize_window.

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 implies when to use the tool: to relocate a window to another workspace without changing the current view. It also notes the default focused-window behavior, but it does not state exclusions or explicitly compare against alternatives like view_workspace.

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