move_character_to_room

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions the action ('move') and a side effect ('increment its visit count'), but fails to describe critical behaviors such as permission requirements, whether the move is reversible, error conditions (e.g., invalid IDs), or the response format. For a mutation tool with zero annotation coverage, this is a significant gap in 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, efficient sentence that front-loads the core action and includes a secondary effect. There is no wasted verbiage or redundancy, making it easy to parse and understand quickly.

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 the complexity of a mutation tool (moving a character and updating state) with no annotations, no output schema, and incomplete parameter documentation (67% coverage), the description is inadequate. It lacks details on behavioral traits, error handling, return values, and usage context, which are essential for an AI agent to invoke the tool correctly and safely.

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?

The schema description coverage is 67% (2 out of 3 parameters have descriptions), with 'characterId' and 'roomId' documented as UUIDs for the character and destination room. The description does not add meaning beyond this, as it does not explain the purpose of 'sessionId' (which lacks a schema description) or provide additional context like format examples or constraints. With moderate schema coverage, the baseline score of 3 is 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 a character to a room') and an additional effect ('increment its visit count'), which specifies what the tool does. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'move_party' or 'travel_to_location', which might involve similar movement concepts but for different entities or contexts.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as 'move_party' for group movement or 'travel_to_location' for party-based travel. It lacks context on prerequisites, exclusions, or specific scenarios where this tool is appropriate, leaving the agent to infer usage from the tool name alone.

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