move_task

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It implies mutation (moving a task) but does not disclose potential side effects, permission requirements, or reversibility. The statement about automatic handling by siblings adds context, but the description lacks deeper behavioral detail such as what happens to the task's position or any constraints.

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?

Two sentences with zero filler. The purpose is front-loaded, and the usage restriction is stated immediately, making it highly scannable and efficient.

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 moderate complexity (6 params, 1 required) and lack of output schema, the description covers purpose and usage but omits any indication of return behavior or prerequisites. However, schema descriptions handle parameter semantics, and the action is straightforward. The description is nearly complete for a simple move operation, though it could benefit from a note on typical invocation context.

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 each parameter is documented in the schema. The description itself adds no additional parameter meaning beyond the overall action, providing no extra context for parameter selection or relationships. Baseline 3 is appropriate given full schema 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 states a specific action ('Move a task to a different kanban column') with a clear resource and target, and explicitly differentiates from sibling tools by naming start_task and complete_ai_task as automatic alternatives. This makes the tool's purpose unmistakable.

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?

Provides explicit when-to-use guidance ('Only use when explicitly asked') and names the exact sibling tools that handle the operation automatically, giving clear exclusion criteria. This is exemplary usage direction.

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