Move resource

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

Annotations already disclose that this is not read-only and is open-world, so the description need not repeat safety basics. However, it adds almost no behavioral context: it does not explain the overwrite parameter, destination handling, error behavior, or what happens when the destination already exists.

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 no wasted words. Its brevity is appropriate structurally, even though the missing detail is penalized in other dimensions.

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 mutation tool with three parameters, 0% schema coverage, no output schema, and an overwrite option, the description is too sparse. It provides the basic action but not enough context for an agent to call the tool confidently in edge cases.

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% for three parameters, so the description must compensate, but it never mentions source_path, dest_path, or overwrite. The word 'move' implies a source and destination, but overwrite semantics and path expectations remain undocumented.

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 sentence states a clear verb and resource: 'Move a file or directory.' An agent can understand the core action, but the description does not distinguish this tool from the sibling nextcloud_move_item, leaving routing ambiguity between two similarly named move 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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, and no mention of the closely related nextcloud_move_item or copy tools. The agent must infer usage entirely from the name and schema.

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