Copy or move one file within or across workspaces

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

The description discloses critical behaviors beyond the destructiveHint annotation: it denies links, credentials, dependencies, and protected writes; explains no-clobber default with overwrite requiring SHA-256; and describes cross-volume move fallback. These specifics are valuable safety context not present in the annotations.

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 compact and front-loaded, leading with the core purpose and then detailing constraints. It avoids unnecessary words and presents information in a logical flow, though it could benefit from a clear separation of parameter usage from general behavior.

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 tool with 10 parameters, no output schema, and moderate complexity, the description covers important safety and overwrite aspects but omits explanations for max_bytes, create_parents, expected_source_sha256 usage, and action semantics. These gaps could lead to incorrect invocation, especially for a file operation tool.

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 description adds meaning for workspace IDs, overwrite requirements, and no-clobber default, which helps with parameters lacking schema descriptions. However, it does not explain max_bytes limits, create_parents behavior, or the action enum values, leaving gaps despite the low schema coverage of 40%. It partially compensates but not fully.

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 the exact operation (copy/move) on a single regular file, with workspace confinement. It clearly distinguishes from edit/write operations and sets expectations about scope. The phrasing 'Core FolderBridge regular-file copy/move' is specific and actionable.

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 parameter-level guidance (workspace IDs, overwrite behavior) but does not explicitly indicate when to choose this tool over siblings like edit_file or write_file. There is no mention of conditions for selecting this tool or exclusions for other operations, leaving tool selection to inference.

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