move

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

Beyond the idempotentHint and openWorldHint=false annotations, the description discloses real side effects: connectors follow the moved shape and directly moved arrows detach. That is exactly the kind of consequence an agent needs before mutating a diagram. It does not explain the coordinate system or what happens to attached text offsets, keeping it short of a 5.

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, front-loaded with the primary action and followed by the side-effect caveat. No filler or 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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be described, and annotations cover idempotency. However, for a geometry mutation with three undocumented parameters, the missing coordinate semantics leave a real gap an agent must guess at.

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% for three required parameters, so the description must carry the burden and it does not. It never states whether x/y are absolute scene coordinates, whether units are pixels, or what element_id accepts (shape, text, arrow).

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 gives a specific verb and resource ("Move an element and its label") and clarifies that the label travels with the element, which distinguishes it from siblings like resize or update_element. It does not explicitly name those siblings, so differentiation is implied rather than stated.

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?

There is no statement of when to choose this tool over update_element or resize, and no prerequisites or exclusions. The agent must infer that repositioning uses move while other property changes use update_element.

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