Move or rename files in a Colab runtime's sandboxed workspace by specifying source and destination relative paths. Manage file organization within the MCP workspace directly.
Move/rename a file within the runtime's sandboxed workspace. Path is relative to the runtime's sandboxed workspace (e.g. /content/mcp_workspace).
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| source | Yes | ||
| session_id | No | ||
| destination | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It adds one useful context detail: paths are relative to the sandboxed workspace. However, it does not disclose overwrite behavior on the destination, whether directories are created, what happens if the source is missing, or any runtime/session requirements.
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 sentences, front-loads the operation and resource, and provides the necessary path-scoping context with an example. Every sentence contributes useful information with no redundancy.
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 file-move operation, the description covers the core action and path semantics. However, no output schema or annotations exist, and the description omits session_id and overwrite/destination semantics, leaving some ambiguity for an agent deciding how to invoke the tool 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%, so the description must compensate. It does clarify that source and destination are workspace-relative paths and gives an example, but it never mentions the optional session_id parameter or explains how it affects execution. One of the three parameters is entirely 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 states a precise action ('Move/rename a file') and a clear resource scope ('within the runtime's sandboxed workspace'). This distinguishes it from sibling file tools like colab_read_file, colab_write_file, colab_delete_file, and colab_upload_file, none of which perform move/rename operations.
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 implies usage context through the file-operation verb and sandbox scoping, so an agent can infer it is for relocating files inside the workspace. However, it does not explicitly state when to prefer this tool over alternatives, nor does it mention exclusions such as moving files between runtimes or outside the sandbox.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.