cursor_history_migrate

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

The description prominently warns about the destructive nature when moving, noting that the original is deleted. It suggests a precautionary backup. However, it omits details like permission requirements or behavior if the destination workspace already contains sessions.

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 short and impactful, front-loading the destructive warning. Every sentence adds value, and no space is wasted.

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?

While the description covers the core function and behavioral highlights, it could further explain prerequisites (e.g., destination workspace must exist) or error handling. Given the tool's complexity and no output schema, it is mostly complete but not exhaustive.

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?

All parameters are described in the input schema, and the description adds useful context: session indexes are 1-based as shown in list output, destination is an absolute path, and mode effects are clarified. This adds meaningful beyond schema.

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 identifies the tool's purpose: moving or copying chat sessions between workspaces. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools by mentioning backup as a separate action and by specifying the destructive nature of the 'move' mode.

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 includes a recommendation to create a backup first, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives. It implies copying is safer, but lacks clear conditions for use.

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