drive_move_file

Does 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 thoroughly explains the effects: parent changes, id/name/contents preserved, links keep working, moving a folder moves its contents, and the create_destination flag behavior with a sensible default. It even explains the rationale behind the default. This is exceptionally transparent for a mutation tool.

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 structured into three clear paragraphs: the main action, the behavioral effects, and parameter details plus return. Every sentence adds value, but it is longer than strictly necessary. The information is well-organized and front-loaded, though it could be tightened without losing clarity.

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 move operation with three parameters and an existing output schema, the description covers all essentials: what it does, what changes and what doesn't, how parameters work, the safety default, and the return value. No critical information is missing for an agent to call 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 fully document each parameter. It does: 'file' is a Drive file id or path from My Drive root; 'destination_folder' is likewise an id or path and must resolve to a folder; 'create_destination' creates missing folders along the path and defaults to False. This adds substantial meaning beyond the schema's bare types.

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 a file or folder into a different Drive folder.' It specifies the verb (move), the resource (file or folder in Drive), and differentiates from siblings like rename or update by noting that id, name, and contents are untouched. This makes the tool's purpose unambiguous.

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 provides clear context for when to use this tool (to change an item's parent) and explains important caveats (moving a folder moves everything under it, create_destination behavior). However, it does not explicitly name alternative tools or state when not to use it, leaving some inference to the agent. The guidance is strong but not fully explicit.

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