Move Components

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

The description indicates a mutation operation ('Move'), but does not disclose additional behavioral traits such as whether the operation is reversible or what the output contains. Annotations are present but the description adds minimal value beyond stating the action.

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 sentence, concise, and front-loaded with the key purpose and operation. Every word is necessary and there is 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?

While the description covers the core operation, it omits context about the world_space parameter and does not explain what the tool returns. The presence of an output schema reduces the need for return value explanation, but the description still feels minimal for a tool with four parameters.

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 description's mention of 'relative translation or absolute position' adds some clarity but does not significantly enhance understanding beyond what the schema already provides for each parameter.

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 clearly states the action 'Move' and the resource 'mesh components (vertices, edges, faces)', and specifies the two modes 'relative translation' and 'absolute position', distinguishing it from sibling modeling tools like bevel, boolean, etc.

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 lacks explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives or the conditions for choosing relative vs absolute mode. The schema covers mutual exclusivity but the description does not elaborate.

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