move_item

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It usefully discloses that coordinates are absolute board coordinates with center at (0,0), but omits whether the move is reversible/undoable, whether other items are affected, and any required permissions for a mutation.

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?

Front-loaded with the core action and followed by usage and coordinate framing; every sentence earns its place. Tight and efficient with no redundancy.

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 mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description covers purpose, when to use, and coordinate semantics well. It could go further on side effects, reversibility, and failure behavior to be fully complete.

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 coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents all four params and the baseline is 3. The description adds meaning beyond the schema by explaining the coordinate reference frame (absolute, center 0,0), which is essential to supplying correct x/y values.

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?

States a specific verb+resource ('Moves an existing item to a new position') that cleanly distinguishes it from creation, content-update, and deletion siblings. The coordinate-system detail further sharpens the intent.

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?

Gives clear use cases ('reorganize layout, avoid overlaps, or align items visually'), which tells the agent when repositioning is appropriate. It stops short of naming an alternative or exclusion (e.g., when to prefer update_item_content vs move_item).

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