move_to_collection

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

The description discloses the unlinking behavior, which is a key side effect. However, it does not mention other behavioral aspects such as whether the collection must exist, whether the object retains its location, or authorization requirements. Since no annotations are provided, the description partially fulfills 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 concise and uses a structured docstring format (Args, Returns). It is front-loaded with the main purpose. No redundant information is present.

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 simple move operation, the description covers the main action, parameters, and return value. It implicitly handles multiple objects via a list. However, it does not explain edge cases like moving to a non-existent collection or moving a subset of objects.

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?

The description adds meaning to both parameters beyond the schema: 'object_names: List of object names to move' and 'collection_name: Name of the destination collection.' With 0% schema description coverage, this provides essential clarification.

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 objects to a collection') and the effect ('unlinking them from their current collections'). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools by specifying the moving aspect, which is unique among collection-related tools.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention prerequisites, limitations, or compare with other tools like 'set_collection_visibility' or 'parent_objects'.

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