tenki_move_path

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

Annotations already indicate a mutating, non-idempotent operation, so the description carries a lower burden. Even so, it adds no behavioral details beyond the path scope that is already present in the schema. It does not mention overwrite behavior, failure modes, whether the operation is atomic, or what happens if the destination 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 only two short sentences, with the primary action front-loaded and no filler. Every word contributes either to stating the operation or essential path constraints.

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 simple move/rename operation the description is mostly sufficient given the schema coverage. However, it omits details about destination conflicts, whether existing files are overwritten, and what result the agent should expect, leaving some ambiguity for correct invocation 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 100%, so all three parameters are already well documented in the input schema. The description restates the '/home/tenki' constraint but adds no new parameter-level meaning, making the baseline 3 appropriate.

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 or rename') and the resource ('a file or directory within a sandbox'), with the path scope '/home/tenki' adding precision. It does not explicitly differentiate from sibling file operations, but the verb+resource is specific enough for basic disambiguation.

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 usage is implied by the verb 'Move or rename' and the stated sandbox scope Mendatory. However, there is no explicit guidance about when to use this tool instead of alternatives like tenki_write_file, tenki_remove_path, or a copy operation, and no exclusions are provided.

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