Move All Cards

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only restates the core action and gives no information about side effects, reversibility, permission requirements, what happens to archived cards, or the success/failure response. A bulk mutation like 'move all cards' needs more transparency.

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?

The description is a single, front-loaded sentence with zero filler. Every word earns its place and the core behavior is immediately understandable.

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?

This is a bulk mutation with no annotations, no output schema, and no warnings about scale or side effects. An agent would benefit from knowing whether the move is reversible, whether it affects archived cards, or what confirmation/return is expected. The current description is minimal and leaves important operational context unstated.

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% and each parameter already has a clear description (source list, destination board, destination list). The description adds no additional parameter meaning, but the schema sufficiently covers the semantics, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 action ('Move'), a specific resource ('all cards'), and the transformation ('from one list to another'). It clearly distinguishes itself from siblings like move_card (single card) and archive_all_cards (archiving instead of moving).

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?

The description implies when to use the tool: when every card in a source list should be moved to a destination list. However, it does not explicitly mention alternative tools like move_card for individual moves or archive_all_cards for archiving, nor does it state exclusions or preconditions.

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