move_shape

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the action without mentioning side effects, preconditions (e.g., shape must exist), failure modes, or reversibility. For a mutation tool, this is a significant gap.

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 concise sentence that front-loads the core action and coordinate system with no extraneous information. Every word contributes to the meaning.

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 simple move operation, the description is minimally adequate, but it lacks context about behavior when pageIndex is omitted (whether the shape moves on its current page), error conditions if the shape doesn't exist, or any other operational details. The absence of an output schema increases the need for description-provided context, which is not met.

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 provides full descriptions for all four parameters, including coordinate meanings and page index. The description adds no new parameter semantics beyond reiterating 'top-left' which is already specified in the schema. The baseline of 3 applies since schema coverage is 100%.

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'), a resource ('shape'), and the coordinate system ('top-left coordinates in inches'). It clearly differentiates from sibling tools like add_shape or resize_shape by its focus on repositioning, making the purpose unambiguous.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The verb implies usage for moving shapes, but there is no explicit mention of selection criteria, exclusions, or references to sibling tools, leaving the agent to infer from context alone.

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