Move inventory item

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

The annotations already declare this is a non-readonly but idempotent and non-destructive operation. The description adds meaningful behavior by noting that sub_location is optional and that null clears it, but it omits error behavior, what happens to the source entry, and the meaning of format.

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 core action and then the required/optional parameter details. There is no redundant or wasted wording.

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 a low-complexity mutation with annotations covering safety and idempotency, and the description covers the required parameters and null-clearing behavior. However, it omits explanation of the format parameter and any return or error context, which is notable because there is no output schema.

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 carry parameter meaning. It explains three of four parameters, including the useful null-clearing semantics for sub_location, but it never explains the format enum (slim/full), leaving that parameter opaque.

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: 'Move a whole inventory entry to another location.' The word 'whole' adds useful scope, distinguishing it from partial inventory adjustments, but it does not explicitly differentiate itself from sibling tools such as add_inventory_item or consume_inventory_item.

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 implies usage through the verb 'Move', but provides no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance. It also does not mention alternatives like update or consume tools, so an agent must infer the selection context.

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