Move item

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=true, but the description adds nothing about behavior. Most importantly, the meaning of the 'overwrite' flag (whether an existing destination is silently replaced) is never disclosed, and destructiveHint=false could lead an agent to assume overwriting is safe. No return-value or error behavior is mentioned.

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?

It is a single short, front-loaded sentence with no filler, so it is concise, but conciseness here comes at the cost of substance rather than being an efficient summary.

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 three-parameter mutation with no annotations beyond generic hints and no output schema, the description should carry the burden. Pointing to move_resource gives partial relief, but an agent still lacks the path semantics, overwrite behavior, and success/failure response needed to invoke it correctly.

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 0% and the description supplies no parameter meaning at all. source_path, dest_path, and especially overwrite (default false) are completely undocumented, leaving the agent to guess whether paths are absolute, relative to a user root, or whether overwrite replaces or errors.

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 identifies the tool only by reference to a sibling ('Alias for move_resource'), so the actual verb+resource (moving a file/folder from source_path to dest_path) must be inferred from the other tool's name. It does distinguish this from siblings in the sense of declaring equivalence, but never states what the operation itself does.

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?

There is no guidance on when to call nextcloud_move_item versus nextcloud_move_resource, or versus nextcloud_copy_item / nextcloud_list_contents. Calling it an 'alias' actually leaves the agent unsure which of the two identical-sounding tools it should prefer.

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