Move cipher selected put

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is partially covered. The description adds only that the operation is 'bulk', and omits critical behavior for a mutation: required permissions, whether the target folder must already exist, what happens to partially failing items, and whether the move is reversible.

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?

A single short, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words and the core action stated first. It is arguably too terse, but under-specification is better penalized under other dimensions than counted as a conciseness failure.

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 undocumented parameters, no output schema, and only partial annotation coverage, the description should define 'selected', describe the request payload, and note auth/folder prerequisites. It does none of these, leaving the agent with too little to invoke it safely.

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?

All three parameters (form, params, json_body) have 0% schema description coverage, and the description says nothing about their contents, such as that json_body must carry the folder id and the list of selected cipher ids. With the schema doing none of the work, the description entirely fails to compensate.

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 gives a specific verb (move) and resource (ciphers) plus scope (bulk, into a folder), which is more than a restatement of the name. It does not explain what 'selected' means or how this PUT alias differs from the sibling vaultwarden_move_cipher_selected, so sibling differentiation is missing.

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 vaultwarden_move_cipher_selected (the non-PUT variant) or the general vaultwarden_put_cipher with a folder change. The '(PUT alias)' remark hints that a duplicate route exists but does not tell the agent which one to pick.

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