fm_move

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses only the operation and a 'confirm' claim, but does not mention side effects, overwrite behavior, cross-directory semantics, or that moving is destructive to the source path. The statement 'confirm: Required' also conflicts with the schema, where confirm is optional with a default of false.

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 brief and front-loaded with the core verb. It wastes no words, though the brevity contributes to under-specification rather than being balanced with necessary details.

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 mutating file operation with no annotations and a loosely-typed payload, the description omits key details such as payload field names, confirm semantics, and interaction with sibling file commands. It is not complete enough for an agent to confidently construct a correct call.

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%, and the description adds only 'payload: Source/destination body' and 'confirm: Required.' The payload hint is vague, and confirm is misstated as required when the schema marks it optional. With additionalProperties true, an agent still does not know the required body structure.

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 phrase 'Move files' names a concrete operation and resource, and the fm_ prefix makes it clear this belongs to the file-manager tool family. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from siblings like fm_copy or fm_remove, but 'move' is a distinct file operation.

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 given on when to choose fm_move over fm_copy, fm_remove, or fm_trash. The description states what it does but not when it should be used or what alternatives exist.

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