iyke_session_move

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

With no annotations provided, the description discloses key behavioral traits: metadata-only, no restart of claude subprocess, cwd unchanged, and failure on unknown/archived project. It adds value beyond the schema but could mention side effects or return type.

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?

Three sentences, each earning its place: purpose, behavioral limitation, failure condition. No redundancy or excess. Front-loaded with the core action.

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 no output schema and 2 required params, the description covers purpose and key behavior but omits how to obtain thread_id or project_id, and the return value. With sibling tools like session_list and project_list available, referencing them would improve completeness.

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%, so the burden is on the description. It explains project_id implicitly via constraints (unknown/archived), but thread_id is only implied as 'chat thread'. Neither parameter gets explicit format or source guidance.

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 clearly states 'Move a chat thread between projects' with a specific verb and resource. It also distinguishes from sibling tools by noting 'Metadata-only — does not restart the claude subprocess', making its scope explicit.

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 description implies when to use the tool (moving a thread) but does not provide explicit alternatives or when-not-to-use guidance. It only states a failure condition, lacking comparison to sibling tools like session_list or project_set_active.

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