verified_move_tasks

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the key behavior of verification after move, but does not detail what happens on verification failure (e.g., rollback, error reporting). More specifics on side effects and error handling 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 a single, clear sentence followed by structured metadata (category, auth, related tools). It is front-loaded with the essential action and contains no redundant information, making it highly efficient.

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?

Despite having only one parameter, the description is insufficient for a tool that involves a complex array move specification and a verification process. There is no explanation of how to structure moves, what verification entails, output details, or error handling, which are critical for correct invocation.

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%, and the description provides no explanation of the 'moves' parameter, which is an open-ended array of objects with additionalProperties true. The agent receives no guidance on required or optional fields, object structure, or constraints, leaving the parameter effectively 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 description clearly states 'Move tasks, then verify that each moved task is present in the destination project,' specifying the verb (move and verify), the resource (tasks), and the unique verification step. This distinguishes it from siblings like 'move_tasks' which likely only moves without verification.

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 includes a 'Category: Verified Actions' and lists related tools ('move_tasks', 'set_subtask_parent'), providing context for when to use this tool (when verification is needed). However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or provide alternatives, though the category hints at a trade-off in safety vs. speed.

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