move_memento

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the disclosure burden. It discloses the bidirectional move behavior and the prerequisite requirement, but doesn't state outcomes like whether the original is deleted, idempotency, or failure behavior when IDs/scope are invalid. Adequate but not rich behavioral context.

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?

Three concise sentences with zero waste. Front-loads the core action, then the when-to-use, then the prerequisite. Every sentence earns its place.

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 (2 params, no output schema, no nested objects) so the description covers the essentials. However, given no annotations and no output schema, it could usefully disclose whether the memento is removed from the original scope after moving and any error conditions. Adequate but not 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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema documents both parameters. The description adds the 'reclassify stored memory' framing but doesn't elaborate on target_scope values beyond 'global or repo' which the schema already provides. Baseline 3 is appropriate with full schema coverage.

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?

Specific verb (Moves) + resource (memento) + clear scope transition (global↔repository), explicitly distinguishes the bidirectional nature. Clearly differentiated from sibling tools like delete_memento, save_memento, and get_mementos.

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?

States when to use ('when the user asks to reclassify stored memory') and names a prerequisite (requires init_memento or get_mementos first). It doesn't explicitly name alternatives/exclusions, but the prerequisite guidance provides clear usage context beyond structured fields.

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