move_all

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 discloses the basic action (moving all entities) and the transformation (by dx, dy), but does not mention potential nuances like whether locked layers or hidden entities are affected, or what the operation returns. For a simple geometric transform, this is a minimal but acceptable disclosure.

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, directly action-oriented sentence with no filler. It is front-loaded with the verb and resource, making it highly efficient and easy to parse.

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 tool has low complexity (two numeric parameters) and an output schema is present, so the description does not need to detail return values. It provides the core transformation but lacks any usage exclusions or behavioral nuances. Given the simple nature, it is adequate but not comprehensive.

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 input schema has 0% description coverage, so the description must compensate. The phrase 'by (dx, dy)' clarifies that dx and dy are displacement deltas, which adds meaning beyond the bare schema types. However, it does not elaborate on units or coordinate system, which is likely inferred given the CAD context.

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 verb ('Move') and resource ('ALL entities') with a clear scope. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like move_entity, which implies a single-entity operation. The purpose is immediately obvious.

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 word 'ALL' implies this tool is for moving every entity at once, providing a clear context. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this versus the alternative move_entity for individual entities, so the guidance remains implied rather than explicit.

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