Move a Ygdria placement

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

Annotations already declare readOnly=false, idempotent=true, destructive=false, and openWorld=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds no behavioral detail beyond 'move': it does not state whether descendants move with the node, how cycles are prevented, what permissions are required, or what side effects occur.

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 two short sentences, front-loaded with the action and then the key identifier clarification. There is no filler or repetition.

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 tree mutation with no output schema and no schema parameter descriptions, the definition is too thin. An agent still lacks guidance on destination placement semantics, position meaning, subtree behavior, cycle/error handling, and how this differs from the plural move_placements sibling.

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% for all three required parameters. The description clarifies only that placementId, not noteId, identifies the moved item; it says nothing about parentPlacementId or position, leaving two of three parameters with no semantic explanation beyond their names and types.

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 uses a specific verb and resource: 'Move a placement tree node,' and it disambiguates the item identifier from noteId. It does not explicitly distinguish this tool from the sibling move_placements, nor does it clarify the scope of the tree move.

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?

There is no explicit guidance on when to use move_placement versus the sibling move_placements, or when not to use it. The only usage hint is the parenthetical 'placementId, not noteId,' which clarifies identity but not situational appropriateness.

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