move_position

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

With no annotations, the description partially discloses behaviors: master API key requirement and a max legs limit. However, it does not clarify side effects like whether positions are removed from the source UID or other state changes. Additional behavioral context (e.g., is it reversible?) would improve 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 extremely concise: a single purpose line followed by a structured Args list. Every sentence adds value, and the key information (constraints, leg structure) is front-loaded. 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?

Given moderate complexity (3 params, nested legs), no output schema, and no annotations, the description provides essential information (purpose, permissions, leg structure, max legs). However, it lacks prerequisites, return value description, and behavioral outcomes (e.g., what happens to source positions). Adequate but with notable gaps.

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% (no parameter descriptions). The description adds meaningful details: explains from_uid and to_uid as source/destination, and specifies the structure of each leg (category, symbol, price, side, qty). This compensates well for the schema gap, though lacks examples or format details.

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 positions between UIDs'. It specifies a constraint ('master API key only') which further clarifies usage. It distinguishes from siblings like get_positions (read) and get_move_position_history (history).

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 usage via the 'master API key only' and 'Max 25 legs per request' constraints, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives. No alternatives or when-not-to-use guidance is provided.

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