hey_move_to

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

Discloses return format ({success, error?}), reversibility, and scope boundaries beyond annotations. Annotations already indicate non-read-only, non-destructive, and idempotent; description adds context confirming these.

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?

Every sentence provides essential information—action, return value, usage advice, reversibility, and exclusions. No redundancy; core purpose is front-loaded.

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?

Covers primary use cases and return format. Minor gaps exist (e.g., error conditions for invalid id), but the presence of 'error?' in return implies error handling. With no output schema, this is sufficient.

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?

Input schema has 100% description coverage, so baseline is 3. Description adds value by explaining the meaning of each destination value and when to use them, going beyond the schema's enum labels.

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?

Clearly states the action (move email thread) and the specific views (imbox, feed, paper_trail). Differentiates from sibling tools by noting it does not affect trash, spam, or screener.

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?

Explicitly says when to use each destination (paper_trail for receipts, feed for newsletters, imbox to restore) and provides alternatives for other actions (hey_set_status, hey_screen).

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