move_to_notes

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden but only states the action without behavioral details. It doesn't disclose whether this is a destructive operation (e.g., removes reminder from original location), requires specific permissions, has side effects, or what the response looks like (e.g., success confirmation or error handling).

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, efficient sentence with zero wasted words. It is appropriately sized and front-loaded, directly stating the tool's purpose without unnecessary elaboration.

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?

Given no annotations and no output schema, the description is incomplete for a mutation tool. It lacks details on behavioral traits (e.g., what 'move' entails operationally), error conditions, or return values, leaving significant gaps for an agent to understand the tool fully.

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 the schema already documents both parameters ('id' and optional 'note'). The description adds no additional meaning about parameter usage, such as format of 'id' or purpose of 'note' beyond what's in the schema, meeting the baseline for high coverage.

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') and target resource ('reminder to permanent notes'), making the purpose understandable. However, it doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like 'delete_reminder' or 'complete_reminder' regarding what happens to the original reminder after moving.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'delete_reminder' or 'complete_reminder'. The description lacks context about prerequisites (e.g., whether the reminder must exist) or exclusions (e.g., cannot move already completed reminders).

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