Move task

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden for a mutation tool and discloses almost nothing about side effects: what happens to the positions of other tasks in the source/destination lane, whether the operation is atomic or idempotent, or what permissions are needed. The position default it mentions is already declared in the schema.

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?

A single sentence with the primary action front-loaded and the two modes packed into a parenthetical. Nothing is wasted and nothing is buried.

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 three-parameter mutation with full schema coverage and no output schema, the description covers the core action and both modes adequately. The remaining gap is behavioral (side effects on surrounding tasks), not structural.

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 coverage is 100%, so all three parameters are documented in the schema itself. The description adds one genuinely useful nuance — that lane may be the task's existing lane, turning the call into a reorder — which is the correct baseline-plus value.

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?

"Move a task" names a specific verb and resource, and the parenthetical "(or reorder within one)" distinguishes the two modes the tool supports. It does not, however, distinguish itself from sibling update_task, which an agent might reasonably guess also changes a task's lane.

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?

Usage is only implied: the parenthetical suggests you can pass the task's current lane to reorder, but there is no explicit "use this instead of update_task" guidance, no prerequisites, and no failure conditions described.

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