move_item

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

The description discloses a key behavioral trait: the tool can either preview the move or execute it with confirmation. Since annotations are empty, this disclosure is especially valuable. It does not elaborate on side effects, but the preview/confirm distinction is clearly stated.

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, front-loaded sentence that delivers the core functionality without unnecessary detail. It earns every word.

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?

The output schema exists, so return values are covered elsewhere. However, the description omits details about the confirmation flow (e.g., that confirm defaults to false) and does not compensate for the lack of annotations or parameter descriptions. It is minimally adequate but leaves gaps.

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 does not explain any of the four parameters. The schema property names (source_list, destination_list, item, confirm) are self-explanatory, but the description adds no additional meaning, leaving the agent to infer semantics from names alone.

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 uses a specific verb 'move' with a clear resource ('item between grocery lists'), and it distinguishes itself from sibling tools like add_item, remove_item, and complete_item. The phrase 'Preview or, with confirmation, move' also communicates the tool's dual mode, adding clarity.

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 context is clear: the tool moves items between grocery lists. It does not explicitly mention alternatives (e.g., using remove_item and add_item) or exclusions, but the intent is unambiguous for a user familiar with grocery list operations.

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