move_selected_items

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses the core effect (all selected items are shifted by delta_sec seconds), but omits whether negative deltas are allowed, what happens with no selection, permission/undo implications, or collision/overlap behavior. For a mutation tool with zero annotation coverage, this is thin.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with the verb and effect stated first and zero wasted words. Well sized for the tool's simplicity.

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 one-parameter mutation tool with no output schema, the description covers the essential effect but leaves selection-state requirements, delta sign semantics, and undo/error behavior unstated. Adequate but with clear gaps given the absence of annotations.

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 0% and the single parameter has no description, so the description must compensate. It does add the unit and meaning ('by delta_sec seconds'), but does not explain sign conventions (does a negative value move items earlier?) or constraints, leaving partial ambiguity.

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 ('shift the position of') and resource ('all currently selected items') plus the operative parameter, which distinguishes it from siblings like glue_selected_items or split_items_at_time. It is clear, though it does not explicitly contrast itself with those other selected-item operations.

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 use this tool versus alternatives, nor any prerequisite such as needing items selected first (relevant given siblings select_items_on_track and select_tracks). Usage is only inferable from the phrase 'currently selected items'.

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